# Boozer agrees to terms with Jazz



## CavsTalk

ESPN News had it on the ticker.

Unreal, I really hate this guy now.,


----------



## Ballscientist

he worths 6 yrs $70M? I think Cavs will match it. 

3 all-stars level:
Boozer
Z
LeBron


----------



## -James-

> Originally posted by <b>CavsTalk</b>!
> ESPN News had it on the ticker.
> 
> Unreal, I really hate this guy now.,


really?!?... what a ****face. the cavs do him a favour, so they can pay him what he deserves and he ****s them right up the ***. what a son of a *****.


----------



## Like A Breath

> Originally posted by <b>Ballscientist</b>!
> he worths 6 yrs $70M? I think Cavs will match it.
> 
> 3 all-stars level:
> Boozer
> Z
> LeBron


They don't have full bird rights so they can't match.


----------



## Ballscientist

how about getting rid of Boozer and signing Martin?


----------



## -James-

> Originally posted by <b>Ballscientist</b>!
> how about getting rid of Boozer and signing Martin?


i dout they hav the room. and id rather have booz anyways so why sign someone for more when u can match for less?


----------



## Damian Necronamous

Holy crap, I even hate this guy now.

What an *******.:no:


----------



## Nevus

I thought Boozer and the Cavs had a verbal agreement? This is really starting to worry me.


----------



## MJG

I've already read several negative comments about Boozer, and I just don't get it. He didn't ask management not to pick up option, did he? Fact is, Boozer made the choice any smart person would and took the contract woth $20+ million more than the other. It's not like he's going to Atlanta either; Utah is a good team with a need for a player at Boozer's position.

Basically, Cleveland took a risk, and they lost out. I don't think there's any way this should shed a negative light on Boozer. I wouldn't place the plame on anyone here, but if you feel the need to, put it on Paxon.



> Originally posted by <b>Nevus</b>!
> I thought Boozer and the Cavs had a verbal agreement? This is really starting to worry me.


Maybe they did, but since nothing can be signed for another week, there's nothing stopping him from going elsewhere.


----------



## WXHOOPS

> Originally posted by <b>Ballscientist</b>!
> he worths 6 yrs $70M? I think Cavs will match it.
> 
> 3 all-stars level:
> Boozer
> Z
> LeBron


That's the thing. The Cavs can only give him the MLE of 5 million. So, the Cavs can't match the offer. Dumb *** Paxson screwed up and didn't pick up his option. Wouldn't be surprised to see Paxson get his *** fired over this stunt.


----------



## reHEATed

its a offer sheet right??

Wasnt Boozer restricted


----------



## jazzy1

This is a huge error by Cavs management if in fact this happens. Alot of Fans might be mad at Boozer but he knows that he needs to strike while the iron is hot he knows he could have a Juwan Howard type career and that he needs only show himself loyalty. 

If I was a Cavs fan I would hate this guy some kind of bad but I can't hate a guy for getting paid I just can't. 

Cavs had Boozer over a barrel let him out and now they're screwed. 

I'm having trouble understanding if he's restricted or if he's unrestricted.


----------



## MJG

> Originally posted by <b>wadecaroneddie</b>!
> its a offer sheet right??
> 
> Wasnt Boozer restricted


Yes and yes. However, this is a Gilbert Arenas type of situation, where the Cavs can only match up to the MLE. I don't know the exact rules off the top of my head, but it has to do with Cleveland being over the cap and Boozer having only played with them for two years as a second round pick.


----------



## jazzy1

> Originally posted by <b>WXHOOPS</b>!
> 
> 
> That's the thing. The Cavs can only give him the MLE of 5 million. So, the Cavs can't match the offer. Dumb *** Paxson screwed up and didn't pick up his option. Wouldn't be surprised to see Paxson get his *** fired over this stunt.


Funniest post in here. I hate laughing at your disgust but its still funny.


----------



## Lurch

I like this team! 

PG Arroyo
SG Harpring 
SF Kirilenko 
PF Boozer
C Okur

Bench- Giricek, Kris Humpheries, Lopez, Ostertag??, Bell.


----------



## duckman1734

WOW, I can not believe that. Well that sucks what an *******:upset: . The Cavs can't match that. Holy jeez, Why would you do that. That's confusing to me. :curse: 

I'm at a loss for words.


----------



## Nevus

> Originally posted by <b>MJG</b>!
> I've already read several negative comments about Boozer, and I just don't get it. He didn't ask management not to pick up option, did he? Fact is, Boozer made the choice any smart person would and took the contract woth $20+ million more than the other. It's not like he's going to Atlanta either; Utah is a good team with a need for a player at Boozer's position.
> 
> Basically, Cleveland took a risk, and they lost out. I don't think there's any way this should shed a negative light on Boozer. I wouldn't place the plame on anyone here, but if you feel the need to, put it on Paxon.
> 
> 
> Maybe they did, but since nothing can be signed for another week, there's nothing stopping him from going elsewhere.


The only reason the management didn't pick up the option, reportedly, is because Boozer's agent agreed that Boozer would resign. It sounds like they agreed to that and then changed their minds. That's disappointing, to put it lightly.


----------



## reHEATed

> Originally posted by <b>MJG</b>!
> 
> Yes and yes. However, this is a Gilbert Arenas type of situation, where the Cavs can only match up to the MLE. I don't know the exact rules off the top of my head, but it has to do with Cleveland being over the cap and Boozer having only played with them for two years as a second round pick.


i see. What a stupid rule though

You can go over the cap to sign your players, but not second round picks? I dont get the rule. Whats the point


----------



## pavlo11

> Originally posted by <b>Nevus</b>!
> I thought Boozer and the Cavs had a verbal agreement? This is really starting to worry me.


The reports in Salt Lake are saying that it was the Cavs are the ones that broke the promise. They promised to give him the Mid level which now they said they dont have. That is when his agent said well we had better look at our options.


----------



## Ballscientist

> Originally posted by <b>MJG</b>!
> 
> Yes and yes. However, this is a Gilbert Arenas type of situation, where the Cavs can only match up to the MLE. I don't know the exact rules off the top of my head, but it has to do with Cleveland being over the cap and Boozer having only played with them for two years as a second round pick.


So that is not the management problem.


----------



## Nevus

> Originally posted by <b>pavlo11</b>!
> 
> 
> The reports in Salt Lake are saying that it was the Cavs are the ones that broke the promise. They promised to give him the Mid level which now they said they dont have. That is when his agent said well we had better look at our options.


If that's true, then I guess this is the obvious course of action for Boozer and his agent and I wish Boozer the best... and if that's true, the Cleveland management is going to be lynched.


----------



## Pan Mengtu

> really?!?... what a ****face. the cavs do him a favour, so they can pay him what he deserves and he ****s them right up the ***. what a son of a *****.


What? They weren't trying to do him a favor, they were trying to do themselves a favor. They realize that when his contract would have run up, he would have been worth twice as much as he is now. They were trying to get him for cheap.


----------



## arenas809

> Originally posted by <b>Lurch</b>!
> I like this team!
> 
> PG Arroyo
> SG Harpring
> SF Kirilenko
> PF Boozer
> C Okur
> 
> Bench- Giricek, Kris Humpheries, Lopez, Ostertag??, Bell.


That team is a lock for the playoffs, don't forget Snyder...


----------



## The OUTLAW

> Originally posted by <b>MJG</b>!
> I've already read several negative comments about Boozer, and I just don't get it. He didn't ask management not to pick up option, did he? Fact is, Boozer made the choice any smart person would and took the contract woth $20+ million more than the other. It's not like he's going to Atlanta either; Utah is a good team with a need for a player at Boozer's position.
> 
> Basically, Cleveland took a risk, and they lost out. I don't think there's any way this should shed a negative light on Boozer. I wouldn't place the plame on anyone here, but if you feel the need to, put it on Paxon.
> 
> 
> Maybe they did, but since nothing can be signed for another week, there's nothing stopping him from going elsewhere.


His agent went to Paxson with the agreement. While I like Boozer as a player, I now doubt his honor as a person. I really don't believe that he is worth that much money so I understand why he'd sign. I just hope that the Cavs don't go out of their way to match him. I don't want him anymore especially at that price.


----------



## Nevus

I hope the Cavs don't just panic and make some trades for cap space to match it... I think at this point, they have to let him go. If they overpay to keep him, it will hold the team back. Boozer is a good player but comparisons to Brian Grant are not far off. It's not like they are losing LeBron. (Although if the management keeps sucking, I would be anxious about that too.)

I liked Boozer a lot, but this gives the Cavs a chance to get a shot-blocking PF now, which would help their defense a lot.


----------



## Kezersoze

As a Cav fan this sucks balls but I can understand Boozer leaving for the money but it still ****ing sucks! ****! well i guess there goes cleveland's playoff hopes.


----------



## BG7

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=1836318


----------



## SkywalkerAC

Any interest in Donyell Marshall if Boozer is out? Kedrick + filler?


----------



## Mongoose

Wow, that sucks for the Cavs. Just to clear things up, the reason the Cavs can't match is because Boozer only played with Cleveland for two years, and two years with a team only gives you an Early Bird exception equal to the mid-level pay. Had Paxson not let Boozer out of his contract, the Cavs would have had the full Bird rights to him and would have been able to match any offer.

As for that Salt Lake piece about the Cavs not having the mid-level available, that's bull. He was a player for the Cavs for two years, so they get the Early Bird exception for re-signing him, which is separate from the Mid-Level exception for being over the cap. Either the Cavs suddenly got cold feet over paying him that money, or Boozer reneged on his verbal agreement for the bigger paycheck. _Someone_ ended up lying in there...


----------



## The OUTLAW

At this point I think that the Cavs should pursue Swift. Now they have a huge hole at the 4 but as I said a week ago. My biggest fear was that they'd overpay to keep Boozer. This I want to avoid at all costs.


----------



## arenas809

Paxson should be fired on this one...

I'm not believing for 5 seconds Boozer went to management and promised resigning for the MLE, from a business POV, that would be stupid on his part and would cost him millions and millions of dollars.

I think the Cavs assumed he would resign and maybe promised a longer deal after x years, but now he's headed to Utah, and the Cavs will fall even further down in the East without him.

Even Stromile Swift is not an option with the MLE.


----------



## Nevus

> Originally posted by <b>The OUTLAW</b>!
> At this point I think that the Cavs should pursue Swift. Now they have a huge hole at the 4 but as I said a week ago. My biggest fear was that they'd overpay to keep Boozer. This I want to avoid at all costs.


I agree.



> Originally posted by *Mongoose*!
> Wow, that sucks for the Cavs. Just to clear things up, the reason the Cavs can't match is because Boozer only played with Cleveland for two years, and two years with a team only gives you an Early Bird exception equal to the mid-level pay. Had Paxson not let Boozer out of his contract, the Cavs would have had the full Bird rights to him and would have been able to match any offer.
> 
> As for that Salt Lake piece about the Cavs not having the mid-level available, that's bull. He was a player for the Cavs for two years, so they get the Early Bird exception for re-signing him, which is separate from the Mid-Level exception for being over the cap. Either the Cavs suddenly got cold feet over paying him that money, or Boozer reneged on his verbal agreement for the bigger paycheck. Someone ended up lying in there...


Good post. Somewhere in this deal somebody broke the agreement... if it's the Cavs management, Paxson should be fired, he's history. If it's Boozer and/or his agent... that's showing no class. I hope the Cleveland media gets to the bottom of this fast.


----------



## SamTheMan67

Deep down in my heart i hope its aprils fool cuz LBJ cant play all 5 positions..


----------



## Hov

This is a huge loss for the Cavs..
I wanted to see them in the playoffs next year too :no:


----------



## truth

If it is Boozer and his agent being greedy dirtbags,isnt there such a thing that a VERBAL comitment is Binding in a court of law???

If i were Pax,and my job was on the line,I would legally contest it,hopefully win and trade tha MF to the bobcats or the CBA


----------



## Mongolmike

Don't forget, Booz and Bron gotta play nice together this summer on the Olympic team too. Hope Bron doesn't have to be on the floor at the same time.... if it was me, I'd bounce a bullet-pass off the back of his head.


----------



## Wagner2

Un-be-freaking-leivable.

I find it impossible to believe that the Cavs mnanagement could have possibly f***** this up. They had to have been careful and knew what they could offer.. gone to Boozer and his agent.. and agreed on a contract before letting him go. They had to have believed that this was a safe thing to do. 

Which leads me to believe it was Boozer and his agent. They screwed the Cavs and went for the money. And remember all the comments Boozer had in the initial AP article about loving Cleveland and not wanting to go anywhere?? 41-freaking-million-dollars!! What can you possibly do with $68M that can't be done with $41M?? Salt Lake City and Cleveland.. real estate isn't at a premium either place. And BTW.. I realize Cleveland isn't anything spectacular as a city.. but Salt Lake City?? He leaves LeBron and Z for HARPRING and *OKUR* !! 

I find it hard to beleive this was for anything except the money.

Unreal..


----------



## MiamiHeat03

i kind of imagine this would happen but wow i never did expected it. I know if i was a Cavs fan i would be pissed at hell at Paxson.

Fired him now!!


----------



## MikeDC

Absolutely horrendous development for the Cavs. All sides appear to be to blame, but I don't see how you can look at this and not just fire Paxson on the spot. You just can't take a chance like this.

It also seems to show a real lack of understanding of the free agent market. A good GM could and should have seen this thing coming. Perhaps a MLE deal was appealing if other GMs didn't suddenly start handing out huge contracts, but they did. Pax should have seen that coming and he was completely blindsided in most every way. I don't think much more can be said than that.

Is Boozer worth that much? Well, I have to say that I'm not sure he isn't. He's a very good ball player, and I think if he'd been drafted in the top 5 or 10 the way he should have, no one would be batting an eye at giving him a big money deal this year. I guess it's spilled milk now since I can't see how the Cavs could get under the cap enough to match. They'd literally have to firesale their whole team... and for what... to get a guy that double dealed them? Don't see how that can work.

So, after firing Jim Paxson (who by rights should be cleaning out his office as we speak), what to do? Swift sounds like the best option, although I think maybe the Griz would match a MLE deal.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey

> Originally posted by <b>Nevus</b>!
> I thought Boozer and the Cavs had a verbal agreement? This is really starting to worry me.



A verbal agreement for the MLE? Can you blame the guy for going to a better team that will give him boat loads more money? First off, the Cavs shouldn't have declined his deal, simple as that. It was boneheaded, and now it's going to bite them on the ***. 


I don't hate Boozer because he made the better business decision, and he's going to a better team.


----------



## truth

HOLD ON..Am I hearing you guys correctly???



> A verbal agreement for the MLE? Can you blame the guy for going to a better team that will give him boat loads more money? First off, the Cavs shouldn't have declined his deal, simple as that. It was boneheaded, and now it's going to bite them on the ***.




Surely you jest....have you never heard of "your word is your bond"?? amnd if you havent,you may find out much differently in a court of law

I can not imagine for a split second that Cleveland management did not have an ORAL commitment from Boozer and his agent to resign for the MLE...Does anyone think for a split second Paxon would put himself in this situation without some sort of a comitment..No matter how stupid he may be,He had to have Boozers word....

As far as I can tell Boozers agent was approached,entertained the offer and sold it to Boozer...And he bought it...

There is no "market value" issue to be debated.And yes,the Cavs were doing it ftom a business perspective,not an act of kindness.But that is irrelavant..

I fully believe Boozer made an oral comitment and his agent kept on negotiating and got a huge contract..Its unethical,possibly illegal and is sickening to see..

Sorry guys,unless the facts are materially different,this is not about "market value"..Its about honor,someones word,and a total lack of character


----------



## Nevus

> Originally posted by <b>KokoTheMonkey</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> A verbal agreement for the MLE? Can you blame the guy for going to a better team that will give him boat loads more money? First off, the Cavs shouldn't have declined his deal, simple as that. It was boneheaded, and now it's going to bite them on the ***.
> 
> 
> I don't hate Boozer because he made the better business decision, and he's going to a better team.


If you don't want to play for the MLE, you shouldn't offer to take it in order to get a team to let you out of a deal so you can go take more money somewhere else. If that's in fact what happened, it sucks.


----------



## The OUTLAW

I can't state enough that I hope the Cavs do nothing to attempt to match this offer. Let Boozer go. Will it hurt, heck yeah he's a good player. But I don't think that he is worth 11.3 million dollars/yr and while we don't know what will happen next year with the CBA, I think that they'd regret signing him to such a large contract.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey

> Originally posted by <b>truth</b>!
> HOLD ON..Am I hearing you guys correctly???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Surely you jest....have you never heard of "your word is your bond"?? amnd if you havent,you may find out much differently in a court of law
> 
> I can not imagine for a split second that Cleveland management did not have an ORAL commitment from Boozer and his agent to resign for the MLE...Does anyone think for a split second Paxon would put himself in this situation without some sort of a comitment..No matter how stupid he may be,He had to have Boozers word....
> 
> As far as I can tell Boozers agent was approached,entertained the offer and sold it to Boozer...And he bought it...
> 
> There is no "market value" issue to be debated.And yes,the Cavs were doing it ftom a business perspective,not an act of kindness.But that is irrelavant..
> 
> I fully believe Boozer made an oral comitment and his agent kept on negotiating and got a huge contract..Its unethical,possibly illegal and is sickening to see..
> 
> Sorry guys,unless the facts are materially different,this is not about "market value"..Its about honor,someones word,and a total lack of character






Speaking of "your word", were you there in that room, or were you listening on the phone when Boozer and/or his agent told the Cavs he would re-sign for the MLE? Did you hear this yourself? Do you know that it's a fact? 



Maybe Boozer never made that verbal agreement with the Cavs? Maybe that never actually happened my friend.


----------



## The_Franchise

Here is what I made of it. Lack of character stems more from the Cavs owner's side.


----------



## Nevus

> Originally posted by <b>KokoTheMonkey</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Speaking of "your word", were you there in that room, or were you listening on the phone when Boozer and/or his agent told the Cavs he would re-sign for the MLE? Did you hear this yourself? Do you know that it's a fact?
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe Boozer never made that verbal agreement with the Cavs? Maybe that never actually happened my friend.


Well, of course that's an assumption, because that's the information that has been made public during this whole process. That's what has been said, and it's never been suggested that it wasn't true or that there was not a deal. It may not be true, but to the best of anybody's knowledge it is. If it's not true, then the management is truly really stupid and incompetent.

Either they had a deal and somebody broke the deal, or they never had one and the management screwed up... either way someone will be blamed for it. Based on what people know at this point, it looks like Boozer's agent.


----------



## truth

> Lack of character stems more from the Cavs owner's side.


That remains to be seen and after reading your post,i dont think character is the right word 



> Maybe Boozer never made that verbal agreement with the Cavs? Maybe that never actually happened my friend.


Of course i wasnt in that room,because i would have made them sign on the dotted line...But lets be real...

Either Pax and his assistants are absolutely brain dead or there was a breach oc contract..Be it oral or not.

KoKo,doesnt it seem pretty logical that Pax approached Team Boozer ,and made an offer to let Boozer out of his final year for $700,000 if he would be willing to sign for the MLE,the most Cleveland could possibly pay??

Think about it for one second..Do you think Pax said,I like you guys,I will let you out of your contract,go shop your market value and come back to me????

If he did,he is a MORON

If he didnt and I have a funny feeling he didnt Team Boozer is a bunch of hosebags

And the legal system will probaly agree


----------



## LOYALTY

Do I think there was a verbal agreement for Boozer to stay? YES.. I think he made the agreement, then his agent stepped in and saw dollar signs and said, "Uh, hold on a second Carlos." "I know you told the Cavaliers you would take 5 million a year, but I see Mo Money Mo Money Mo Money on the horizon" "Go West Young Man!"

Never expected this from Booz. How do I go about changing my nickname??????


----------



## truth

> Never expected this from Booz. How do I go about changing my nickname??????


Dont have to my friend..its going to arbitration..And team Boozer will lose.....

The question is what is the penalty and do you really want that guy on your squad??


----------



## Mongolmike

If there was an oral agreement, wouldn't that be a form of tampering, which the league frowns upon? I realize an oral contract can hold up in a court, but can an oral AGREEMENT be grounds for filing an NBA grievance (if it is proven)?

All-in-all... as big a Cavs fan as I am.... F-him. Let him walk. Cavs made a mistake, and they are gonna get burnt... but I don't want Boozer back now if he broke his word. Can't complain about the money... but what is a man's word worth? Apparently there is a monetary value........ for some.:no:


----------



## Kezersoze

Isn't what Boozers doing the very definition of selling out?


----------



## Bombtrack2k4

I will now................ hang myself.


----------



## Deadlock

OMG DAMN U BOOZER!!! This is such bull ****.. only too blame half on boozer and his greedy *** agent and the dumb **** Paxon.

GOD WHY DOES EVERYTHING BAD HAPPEN TOO CLEVELAND!!! :upset:


----------



## tpb2

Let Boozer go. He's a horrible defender and his scoring was overrated last year. If people were as picky with him as they were with LeBron, they'd get off this 'booz is the mvp of the cavs' crap. Now we can get a taller PF that really defends inside.


----------



## Nevus

> Originally posted by <b>tpb2</b>!
> Let Boozer go. He's a horrible defender and his scoring was overrated last year. If people were as picky with him as they were with LeBron, they'd get off this 'booz is the mvp of the cavs' crap. Now we can get a taller PF that really defends inside.


That's what I'm thinking, no doubt this is unfortunate but there may be a silver lining if they can find a good defensive PF. Of course, the management will have to make some uncharacteristically good moves to pull this off.

I'd rather have Boozer than not, but not for $11 million per year. They can be a better team spending that money somewhere else.

And like you say, if the Cavs have a good year next season, haters can't give all the credit to Boozer any more. I guess it will have to be Jeff McInnis.


----------



## Cleveland Browns

Thefranchise....boozers agent said that boozer and the cavs agreed to a 6yr/41 mil deal. So your theory just went down the Sh!tter!!!!!


----------



## KokoTheMonkey

> Originally posted by <b>The Franchise</b>!
> Shocking how everyone is jumping on the anti-Boozer bandwagon when Jim Paxson was the one who thought he could get Boozer for $41 million. There are alot of theories floating around about what the Cavaliers could and couldn't of matched but it all boils down to this: Paxson *could* have kept Boozer for one more year and then matched any offer he got in FA. This because he would have bird rights after Boozer played with the Cavs for 3 years. But because he wanted to save some cash, the Cavs didn't pick up Boozer's contract and then fed some crap about loyalty to the team and verbal agreements to the press. Paxson hoped to sign Boozer for the MLE as opposed to going over it next year to match offers he received from other teams. I guess this reflects more on the owner than the GM.
> 
> I don't think Boozer is close to the calibre of Randolph or Stoudemire offensively, but he does know how to get work done on the boards. This is a big loss for Cleveland, because having a player like Boozer giving you second chance opportunities and securing rebounds on the defensive end places you above the rest of the Eastern Conference teams. (Detroit, Indiana, NJ, Miami... all have PF's that can rebound)





Very nice post. 




When I clicked on some of these Boozer to Utah threads, I was expecting more Cavalier bashing than Carlos Boozer bashing. I mean, people are saying "his word" this, and "verbal agreement" that, but at the end of the day, Boozer has signed an offer sheet to go elsewhere. Do you know why this Boozer to Utah deal is getting so much hype? Because there actually is a verbal agreement between the two sides, since his agent himself admitted to this offer sheet. My point is, if Boozer had both a verbal agreement and a deal in place with Cleveland, it would have made the same news as Boozer going to Utah, along with the rest of the FA "agreements". 



Plus, let's not forget Boozer is really cashing in compared to what he *should be making this year*, as well as what the Cavs were offering. Plus, he's going to a better team as well. I mean, what did he do wrong? If he actually did have a verbal agreement with the Cavs, then I could understand the Boozer-bashers a little more, but still not fully.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey

> Originally posted by <b>Cleveland Browns</b>!
> Thefranchise....boozers agent said that boozer and the cavs agreed to a 6yr/41 mil deal. So your theory just went down the Sh!tter!!!!!



Honestly, I'm not trying to show you up or anything, but can you give me a link to where Boozer's agent had an agreement? I'm looking for a direct quote from his agent himself, not some "reported" thing. I say that because it was "reported" that Denver already made a huge offer to Manu, but when Manu's agent himself got on a radio show and was asked about it, he said that it was completely false. The point again is that we don't know if this supposed "verbal agreement" actually took place, unless there is a direct quote from Boozer or Boozer's agent, because the media does seem to have a knack for "reporting" something that has not, or will not happen.


----------



## TyGuy

Koko, do you not understand that the cavs did boozer a favor by letting him out so they could sign him longterm? They could have let him collect 750 k next season, then sign him to a whole bunch of bread the next season. However, he wanted security so they did that for him. What Booz did was jacked and i cant believe anybody would agree with what he did. he is gaining all this on the expense of the cavs, when he could have been loyal to a team that was willing to shell out money to him but at a later date if need be....

Also come on now, you think you are going to find a quote like that... use your head. You think the cavs would be dumb enough to do something so risky if they didnt have some kind of verbal?


----------



## arenas809

> Originally posted by <b>TyGuy</b>!
> Koko, do you not understand that the cavs did boozer a favor by letting him out so they could sign him longterm?


This is what the Cavs and fans want everyone to believe...

They were doing Boozer a favor?

Try they were doing themselves a favor...

This is a perenial all-star caliber PF they were gona lock up to a MLE deal which is way below market value for a guy like Boozer.

Foyle and Okur are getting 8, 9 million per, and Boozer next season should be happy with 4.9?

Stop with the Cavs were doing Boozer a favor garbage, they were looking out for their own interests in this as well.

Paxson will lose his job over this, and Cleveland will be out of the playoffs again.

At least you drafted Luke Jackson.


----------



## Greg Ostertag!

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> This is what the Cavs and fans want everyone to believe...
> 
> They were doing Boozer a favor?
> 
> Try they were doing themselves a favor...
> 
> This is a perenial all-star caliber PF they were gona lock up to a MLE deal which is way below market value for a guy like Boozer.
> 
> Foyle and Okur are getting 8, 9 million per, and Boozer next season should be happy with 4.9?
> 
> Stop with the Cavs were doing Boozer a favor garbage, they were looking out for their own interests in this as well.
> 
> Paxson will lose his job over this, and Cleveland will be out of the playoffs again.
> 
> At least you drafted Luke Jackson.


That's all fine, Arenas... but Cleveland by all rights could've had Carlos Boozer's all-star caliber play at 700k this upcoming season. There is no way that the Cavaliers would've let Boozer out of his contract early if there wasn't an agreement to sign for the MLE, it just wouldn't happen. Therefore, someone has breached their word.

Therefore, there are only two feasible scenarios:

1) Boozer led the Cavs to believe that he would re-sign with them for the MLE, therefore the Cavaliers let him out. There's no way they would've let him play the market if they didn't expect them to re-sign with Cleveland. In this scenario, Boozer gets his pay-day (huzzah), but has reneged on his word, and will be an NBA villain for years to come.

You cannot fault Jim Paxson for believing the word of someone who turns out to be a liar. What Paxson will be judged on is if he can respond to this and ensure the Cavs reach the play-offs - i.e. S&T Z for KMart.

2) The Cavaliers reneged on their "wink wink" deal with Boozer, offering less than the MLE. If this is the case, Paxson should be fired on the spot... and I'd imagine LBJ will leave ASAP if the new GM doesn't make some nice moves.


----------



## arenas809

> Originally posted by <b>Greg Ostertag!</b>!
> 
> 
> That's all fine, Arenas... but Cleveland by all rights could've had Carlos Boozer's all-star caliber play at 700k this upcoming season. There is no way that the Cavaliers would've let Boozer out of his contract early if there wasn't an agreement to sign for the MLE, it just wouldn't happen. Therefore, someone has breached their word.
> 
> Therefore, there are only two feasible scenarios:
> 
> 1) Boozer led the Cavs to believe that he would re-sign with them for the MLE, therefore the Cavaliers let him out. There's no way they would've let him play the market if they didn't expect them to re-sign with Cleveland. In this scenario, Boozer gets his pay-day (huzzah), but has reneged on his word, and will be an NBA villain for years to come.
> 
> You cannot fault Jim Paxson for believing the word of someone who turns out to be a liar. What Paxson will be judged on is if he can respond to this and ensure the Cavs reach the play-offs - i.e. S&T Z for KMart.
> 
> 2) The Cavaliers reneged on their "wink wink" deal with Boozer, offering less than the MLE. If this is the case, Paxson should be fired on the spot... and I'd imagine LBJ will leave ASAP if the new GM doesn't make some nice moves.


At the end of the day, the fact about this situation is that the Cavs f'd themselves in order to try to save some money.

If they pick up the option, they have full bird rights next year and could match any offers. But it's obvious they were thinking why not lock this kid up to a MLE deal this year instead of matching a huge offer next season.

I don't know how anyone can't see that, but its beyond clear.

Neither side is innocent here, the Cavs were trying to do themselves a favor and it looks like Boozer was looking out for his interests.

Let's cut the righteous crap for a minute, if someone offered you 5 million, and someone else offered you 10, you'd take the 10 everytime, why should we expect Boozer to do the same?

Boozer is not a MLE player.

I expect Paxson's resignation in the next 2 weeks, and the Jazz are officially a LOCK for the playoffs.


----------



## kamego

I understand keep your players happy is important but Cleveland should have looked at what the Pistons did with Ben Wallace. Wallace asked for a max contract pay rasie for next season and they told him no they would give it to him once he lived out the last 2 years of his current contract. If you have a deal in place you never let it go. 700k is going to make a huge differance in Cleveland now. Cleveland's playoff hopes all hang onto big Z being able to score every game down low and the rest of the team helping LeBron out.


----------



## futuristxen

**** Carlos Boozer. Mother****er. I hope Lebron beats his *** during the Olympics for this. Greedy *** mother****er. Enjoy mother****ing Utah Carlos.

Nah but **** em.

It's the Luke and Bron show now. Start Diop or Battie at the 4, and at least they won't be a defensive liability like Boozer was.

Oh I hate this guy right now. I can't believe he did that. I've only read page one so I hope maybe on page 2 of this thread someone will tell me this was only a joke.

And yeah. Paxson should get fired over this too.


----------



## CrookedJ

IF Cleveland was really just being"nice" they would have offered him a short mid level deal, with the implication that a larger deal would follow. They got greedy trying to lock up a player for 6 years at a below market salary.
In one year let alone 3 or 4 he's gonna be worth way more than he is now, so trying to lock him up long term at mid level is silly. 

HE should not have verbally committed to thier deal if he didn't intend on staying, who knows if he had agreed to 6 years or just to a MLE deal though?? A MLE for 1-2 years would have been a big raise for him, then the promise of another big raise if he performs as well as most people think he will. That is very different from what Cleveland proposed.


----------



## arenas809

> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> It's the Luke and Bron show now


lolololololol.....

:no:


----------



## KokoTheMonkey

> Originally posted by <b>TyGuy</b>!
> Koko, do you not understand that the cavs did boozer a favor by letting him out so they could sign him longterm? They could have let him collect 750 k next season, then sign him to a whole bunch of bread the next season. However, he wanted security so they did that for him. What Booz did was jacked and i cant believe anybody would agree with what he did. he is gaining all this on the expense of the cavs, when he could have been loyal to a team that was willing to shell out money to him but at a later date if need be....
> 
> Also come on now, you think you are going to find a quote like that... use your head. You think the cavs would be dumb enough to do something so risky if they didnt have some kind of verbal?



Use my head? 


I requested a quote from Boozer's agent saying that they gave a verbal agreement to the Cavs for the MLE to prove that it actually happened. Didn't find one? Can't find one? That's probably because it never happened. 


Cavs fans, you are pointing fingers at the wrong people. *CARLOS BOOZER SHOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN A FREE AGENT THIS OFFSEASON* It's almost as simple as that. They should have kept his option, which would have given them the Bird rights to Boozer, meaning they could have offered him more than anyone else. Instead, the Cavs thought they would reward Boozer for his greatness by paying him half of his market value. That's BS. Boozer is on a better team, and he's making about twice as much as he would with Jazz as opposed to the Cavs. 



I'm using my head, Boozer and his agent used their heads, so it seems to me that Cavs fans and Cavs management are the only ones who aren't using their heads. Boozer should be in a Cavalier uniform this season, not because of his "verbal agreement" that probably never happened, but he should be in his last year of his deal making $800,000, so he could have cashed in with the Cavs next year. Instead, he's a helluva lot more richer than he was, and he's on a better team. It's almost a no brainer for him. Why is he supposed to take half of what his market value is because the Cavs foolishly declined his contract? Again, show me proof that Boozer or his agent actually agreed to something, then I'll understand your side even more. Until then, you're just making assumptions that are being used to place the blame on Boozer, instead of Paxson.


----------



## CavsTalk

Dont generalize Cavs fans first of all..

Second, Booz has said nothing but he was going to stay in Cleveland. So he is an *** to go back on his word.

Paxson was an idiot for letting him try that, I said that from day one.

Third, it's not all bad...Booz is now grossly over paid and the Jazz will regret this signing like the Okur signing. He is now a feature player, not a role player to grab boards. Expectations come with money, I hope Jazz fans will enjoy the Garnetts and Duncans getting 30 20 everytime they play the Jazz.

All is not lost if we get Martin....if not, **** you Paxson...quit.


----------



## mvblair

> Originally posted by <b>KokoTheMonkey</b>!
> I requested a quote from Boozer's agent saying that they gave a verbal agreement to the Cavs for the MLE to prove that it actually happened. Didn't find one? Can't find one? That's probably because it never happened.


Yeah, I'm waiting to see the actual quote as well. How do we know that Boozer said he would agree to sign for the MLE? 

Managers can easily leak false information to the press in an attempt to make players look bad after the fact. Look at what they've done to T-Mac and Nash. 

Boozer, his agent, and the Cavs management all knew what Boozer was worth. They knew that Utah, Atlanta, and Denver all had money to spend and money to offer Boozer. All parties knew that Boozer was worth more than the MLE, so why would Paxson offer the MLE knowing that other teams would pay him more? 

Paxson said _"our actions have been based upon what Carlos told us he wanted. This was also entirely consistent with his public statements in the media July 1."_ (For the record, I don't know what he said to the media on July 1). 

Maybe Carlos said to Paxson "I will explore my options if you make me a free agent. Maybe I'll sign for the MLE, but if another team gives me a better deal, I'll go with them." 

Just because the Cavs management was the quickest to get out a press release, that doesn't mean you should just take them at their word and believe them before you hear what Boozer says.

Matt


----------



## Bombtrack2k4

I think that Boozer was WORTH the money that Utah is ready to give him. 

He didn't sign anything yet. 

Do you believe anyone could convince him to stay in Cleveland ? 

If I am The NBA I want Boozer in Cleveland, next to Lebron, not Utah. If he had an Oral agreement, they should force him to keep his word. 

Hell Lebron could call Nike to get Boozer a contract that would compensate for the $28 million. I am shure Nike would agree since they want Lebron in the playoffs. 

Those are really unethical ideas, but hey, if they are going to play dirty....


----------



## whiterhino

Boozer is worth WAY more than the MLE, Cleveland had to have known that and therefore are Stupid. My freaking Celts just gave Mark Blount the MLE, give me a break, Boozer is much better and everyone knows that. Your loss Jazz gain, sorry but it's true and no one would take a job paying 10 an hour if someone else offered them the same job in a better atmosphere (better team) for 20 an hour so GET REAL! I mean I'd be bummed too but you are mad at the wrong person!


----------



## TyGuy

Come on you guys, we know paxson is an idiot. However, why would they even do this if there wasn't a deal in place???? I'm saying use your head because obviosuly Cleveland doesnt do this if they didnt have some kind of verbal agreement, make sense?


----------



## TyGuy

> Use my head?
> 
> 
> I requested a quote from Boozer's agent saying that they gave a verbal agreement to the Cavs for the MLE to prove that it actually happened. Didn't find one? Can't find one? That's probably because it never happened.
> 
> 
> Cavs fans, you are pointing fingers at the wrong people. CARLOS BOOZER SHOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN A FREE AGENT THIS OFFSEASON It's almost as simple as that. They should have kept his option, which would have given them the Bird rights to Boozer, meaning they could have offered him more than anyone else. Instead, the Cavs thought they would reward Boozer for his greatness by paying him half of his market value. That's BS. Boozer is on a better team, and he's making about twice as much as he would with Jazz as opposed to the Cavs.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm using my head, Boozer and his agent used their heads, so it seems to me that Cavs fans and Cavs management are the only ones who aren't using their heads. Boozer should be in a Cavalier uniform this season, not because of his "verbal agreement" that probably never happened, but he should be in his last year of his deal making $800,000, so he could have cashed in with the Cavs next year. Instead, he's a helluva lot more richer than he was, and he's on a better team. It's almost a no brainer for him. Why is he supposed to take half of what his market value is because the Cavs foolishly declined his contract? Again, show me proof that Boozer or his agent actually agreed to something, then I'll understand your side even more. Until then, you're just making assumptions that are being used to place the blame on Boozer, instead of Paxson.



Your generalization of cavs fans and your better than everybody attitude is sickening. Of course the cavs could have done that! That was probably the plan but Boozer wanted to get paid NOW! The cavs knew they could only offer him mle, so an agreement had to have been in place or no way cleveland does this. Its really simple to understand but you guys are trying to make it look like Cleveland had no f'n clue what was going on and was trying to screw boozer. It was boozer that wanted the money now, it was paxson for being an idiot thinking he can give a player leverage and trust him.



So again ya use your head! Paxson is dumb but not that dumb. He was duped by a sweet old lady on a motorized cart


----------



## futuristxen

> Originally posted by <b>TyGuy</b>!
> Come on you guys, we know paxson is an idiot. However, why would they even do this if there wasn't a deal in place???? I'm saying use your head because obviosuly Cleveland doesnt do this if they didnt have some kind of verbal agreement, make sense?


Exactly. Yeah the Cavs were dumb to trust Boozer and his agent. But I don't understand how you can possibly think the Cavs let Boozer out of his deal if they were not 100 percent certain that they would retain him. That makes no sense at all. The only logical story is that Paxson had an agreement with Boozer and Boozer saw all the money he could get, and so he renegged on his agreement, as it wasn't binding. He and his agent duped Paxson pretty much is how it looks. Who else does Boozer's agent represent? Because you can bet they won't be Cavs ever.


----------



## TyGuy

Boozers agent is also Kobes agent......


----------



## Bombtrack2k4

*F U BOOZER F U*

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=thanklessjob&prov=cnnsi&type=lgns 

interesting article. Makes you want to throw up. 

" Instead, Paxson and Cleveland owner Gordon Gund nullified their option. They gambled on Boozer's word and set him free. According to a source who was in the room at the time the verbal deal was struck, Boozer told Gund, "If you respect me by not picking up the option, I'll show trust and loyalty to you by signing with you." " 

I still want Pawson fired. He's the Gm, he's the one that is the most responsible for this crap in the organisation and they can't fire the owner. 

BUT FU BOOZER FU 

PS: can we take parts of an article ? If not, I'll take it out. It's not the entire thing.


----------



## futuristxen

> Cleveland cannot match the offer because the Cavaliers are over the salary cap. The only way Cleveland could retain Boozer would be to dump several players and create more than $10 million of cap space, because *Pelinka negotiated an offer that is front-loaded to make it that much harder for Cleveland to match.*


**** CARLOS BOOZER. **** HIM IN THE *** WITH A SHARP METAL OBJECT.:upset:


----------



## Joker

*Re: F U BOOZER F U*



> Originally posted by <b>Bombtrack2k4</b>!
> http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=thanklessjob&prov=cnnsi&type=lgns
> 
> interesting article. Makes you want to throw up.
> 
> " Instead, Paxson and Cleveland owner Gordon Gund nullified their option. They gambled on Boozer's word and set him free. According to a source who was in the room at the time the verbal deal was struck, Boozer told Gund, "If you respect me by not picking up the option, I'll show trust and loyalty to you by signing with you." "
> 
> I still want Pawson fired. He's the Gm, he's the one that is the most responsible for this crap in the organisation and they can't fire the owner.
> 
> BUT FU BOOZER FU
> 
> PS: can we take parts of an article ? If not, I'll take it out. It's not the entire thing.



why did the management take more precautions like sign a written contract where one party does not pick up the option anf offers the MLE, and the other inks a 6 year deal for the full MLE.

then they probably would have sued Boozer, repercussion would be so bad he'd not consider doing anything dishonest.

if they can actually do that, then your management's ignorance and unprofessionalism would shock me to no end.


----------



## TyGuy

*Re: Re: F U BOOZER F U*



> Originally posted by <b>Joker</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> why did the management take more precautions like sign a written contract where one party does not pick up the option anf offers the MLE, and the other inks a 6 year deal for the full MLE.
> 
> then they probably would have sued Boozer, repercussion would be so bad he'd not consider doing anything dishonest.
> 
> if they can actually do that, then your management's ignorance and unprofessionalism would shock me to no end.


That kind of deal most likely would have been illegal, something similar to what Mini did with joe smith.


----------



## tpb2

> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> 
> 
> **** CARLOS BOOZER. **** HIM IN THE *** WITH A SHARP METAL OBJECT.:upset:


Did you not see Boozer's attitude during the rook-soph game? He wasn't joking around either. He puts up a front to be some sort of team captain who's a great guy, but he's shown signs of being a selfish ***. I don't really care about taking the big bucks. It's more about the character of Boozer that could translate to the basketball floor. People just give the guy all the credit because they think he's the heart of the team. LeBron, who has more talent than Boozer could ever dream, has never shown any of these signs. Plus, he has just as much "heart" has him. I hope Boozer sucks next year, and I don't care how childish that sounds.


----------



## Wagner2

I hope he has Grant Hill-like success.


----------



## PatBateman

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> lolololololol.....
> 
> :no:


oh yeah, Arenas and your clips (and Bulls  ) are going to be sooooo much better!!! lmafao!!!



bwahahahaahahahahahahahahahhahaha!!!!! :laugh:


----------



## PatBateman

> Originally posted by <b>KokoTheMonkey</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> Use my head?
> 
> 
> I requested a quote from Boozer's agent saying that they gave a verbal agreement to the Cavs for the MLE to prove that it actually happened. Didn't find one? Can't find one? That's probably because it never happened.
> 
> 
> Cavs fans, you are pointing fingers at the wrong people. *CARLOS BOOZER SHOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN A FREE AGENT THIS OFFSEASON* It's almost as simple as that. They should have kept his option, which would have given them the Bird rights to Boozer, meaning they could have offered him more than anyone else. Instead, the Cavs thought they would reward Boozer for his greatness by paying him half of his market value. That's BS. Boozer is on a better team, and he's making about twice as much as he would with Jazz as opposed to the Cavs.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm using my head, Boozer and his agent used their heads, so it seems to me that Cavs fans and Cavs management are the only ones who aren't using their heads. Boozer should be in a Cavalier uniform this season, not because of his "verbal agreement" that probably never happened, but he should be in his last year of his deal making $800,000, so he could have cashed in with the Cavs next year. Instead, he's a helluva lot more richer than he was, and he's on a better team. It's almost a no brainer for him. Why is he supposed to take half of what his market value is because the Cavs foolishly declined his contract? Again, show me proof that Boozer or his agent actually agreed to something, then I'll understand your side even more. Until then, you're just making assumptions that are being used to place the blame on Boozer, instead of Paxson.


god you're a moron. Yes, let's just get a quote from Boozer or his Agent admitting that they are slime, low-life, *******s. Hmmm, that's intelligent, I'm sure that quote will be coming along shortly.  

Get a grip man. Read the reports. Go to hoopshype where they break it down from numerous different sources and stop defending a greedy prik.


----------



## Nevus

Here's another good Boozer article:

http://www.ohio.com/mld/ohio/sports...umboldt.edu&KRD_RM=9pprqvsttywqypruyuwxpppppp

A recounting of the whole affair with specific information of the negotiations and the order in which things occurred.

Boozer and his agent have been trying to get out of his rookie contract since last summer. They finally convinced the management by appealing to their sense of good will and faith. The management told Boozer clearly that they could only offer him the MLE and that there would be other teams that would offer a lot more money, and that they could offer him more money in a year.

The Cavs were not trying to lowball Boozer. The whole idea came from Boozer's side, and the only reason the management went through with it was because they believed their good will would be reciprocated.


----------



## Lynx

Money talks.


----------



## The_Franchise

Cmon Cleveland fans, both sides were trying to take advantage of each other. Gund didn't let Boozer opt out of his contract because of a verbal agreement, he realized what a steal signing Boozer for the MLE would be. This is a business, and both sides had that in mind.


----------



## Nevus

> Originally posted by <b>The Franchise</b>!
> Cmon Cleveland fans, both sides were trying to take advantage of each other. Gund didn't let Boozer opt out of his contract because of a verbal agreement, he realized what a steal signing Boozer for the MLE would be. This is a business, and both sides had that in mind.


Well of course there was something in it for them, that's why they agreed to take a chance on it at all. But it wasn't their idea.


----------



## Blazer Freak

> Originally posted by <b>Lynx</b>!
> Money talks.


Word. It takes in a very sexy and seductive voice to.


----------



## Cavs Central

I can't fault anyone for taking the cash, I mean really...what would you do?

On the other hand, I believe he did not have to take it to this extreme either, at least I don't think.

He got paid and seems like he has wanted to play for Utah, works out for him.

I'm heartbroken, really. Even though he said he wanted to stay here, it does not mean much, many players want to play elsewhere but don't for many reasons. I don't want Carlos here if he does not want to be here, that simple.

If I were Gund/Paxon, no matter how nice I feel someone is, it's still a business, I would not have gave Carlos a chance to talk to other clubs.

Oh well.


----------



## mvblair

Now we finally here what Carlos Boozer has to say about this situation. 



> from the Cleveland Plain Dealer
> 
> Boozer has been accused of lying and backstabbing the team and its fans because he allegedly told the Cavaliers he would remain in Cleveland...
> 
> "I didn't make a prior agreement. And if I did, I would've stayed here," Boozer said. "For them [Cavaliers] taking shots at my character is incredibly wrong, and I don't understand that. I thought I had a great relationship with them. Maybe they're trying to save face or trying to make up stuff and kill my character. And if that's the road they want to take, that's OK."...
> 
> "But during that meeting, it seemed like they were going down the road of wanting a commitment," *Boozer said. "My agent pulled out the collective bargaining agreement, and he said that the rules don't allow a verbal or written agreement and everyone at the table understood that*. During the course of that meeting, it was brought to my attention that [management] weren't going to pick up the option. They made that [decision] on their own."...


I don't think it's fair to make Boozer a demon out of all this. There are not *two seperate stories*, but there are two seperate sides. Here are some facts that both sides have given:

Did Boozer say he *wanted* to stay in Cleveland? Yes.

Did Boozer say that he *would not* explore other options? No.

Did both sides know that it is *illegal* to make "wink wink" agreements before the scheduled free agency period? Yes.

Did Coach Silas say that Boozer would not be a bigger part of the offense *before* the alleged July 4th weekend? Yes.

It looks to me like the evidence is mounting that the Cavs management screwed up on this one. 

Matt


----------



## CavsTalk

All I need to know is how much Boozer has lied since this offer sheet has been signed and that his agent quit to know who is in the wrong.


----------



## arenas809

> Originally posted by <b>mvblair</b>!
> Now we finally here what Carlos Boozer has to say about this situation.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think it's fair to make Boozer a demon out of all this. There are not *two seperate stories*, but there are two seperate sides. Here are some facts that both sides have given:
> 
> Did Boozer say he *wanted* to stay in Cleveland? Yes.
> 
> Did Boozer say that he *would not* explore other options? No.
> 
> Did both sides know that it is *illegal* to make "wink wink" agreements before the scheduled free agency period? Yes.
> 
> Did Coach Silas say that Boozer would not be a bigger part of the offense *before* the alleged July 4th weekend? Yes.
> 
> It looks to me like the evidence is mounting that the Cavs management screwed up on this one.
> 
> Matt


Thanks, finally someone wants to look at the facts instead of covering their ears and yelling blah blah so they can only hear what they want to hear.


----------



## Spudd

Boozer's story makes no sense, the cavs had boozer locked up for barely anything next season but supposedly just happened to drop the option?
Boozer you are a joke. You are a liar plain and simple, live with your reputation, it certainly seems to paying off for you.


----------

