# Boozer vs Randolph



## Siouxperior (Jan 15, 2003)

Cavs fans-
Who in your opinion will be the better Power Foward in lets say 2 years?


Thoughs?


----------



## Mongolmike (Jun 11, 2002)

Again??? Didn't we just have this thread? I think most everyone has said their opinion about their respective player... right?


----------



## ZBoFanatic (Feb 10, 2003)

:laugh:

i havent posted here in awhile, but wow this is the most laughable argument i've seen yet. this season should prove that.


----------



## Cam*Ron (Apr 13, 2003)

[strike]JailBlazer fans are ****ing idiots.[/strike] 

In two years Boozer will still have the better stats.
He will still be the better player.

*Whoa, Bunk, please watch attacks and cursing. Thanks, Devestata.*


----------



## Mongolmike (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ZBoFanatic</b>!
> :laugh:
> 
> i havent posted here in awhile, but wow this is the most laughable argument i've seen yet. this season should prove that.


and your opinion is...........???


----------



## ZBoFanatic (Feb 10, 2003)

chill pill buddy. be happy, boozer helped bring you lebron.


----------



## ZBoFanatic (Feb 10, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Mongolmike</b>!
> 
> 
> and your opinion is...........???


my opinion is irrelevant. it was already mentioned in the previous thread that opposing teams fans come into this forum with opinions, but "it doesn't work" so i don't wish to state my opinion if it's just going to be responded back with closed-minded replies


----------



## Cam*Ron (Apr 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ZBoFanatic</b>!
> 
> 
> my opinion is irrelevant.


Well why are you posting in this thread? For an attempt to bash someone that thinks Boozer will be better.


----------



## Mongolmike (Jun 11, 2002)

I see ZBoFAnatic that Zach is your favorite player. That's cool... you are entitled to cheer for whoever you like. Souixperior tried to convince us that Zach is better in a different thread, and failed. I guess he thinks the more times he comes into the Cavs forum and poses this question, eventually we would agree? R-Star tried that with a Pacers trade... and that didn't work either. 

So, why do you think Zach is clearly the better player than Carlos?

This year, Zach will be a bench role player again, and Boozer will be a starter... again. Zach hasn't brought your team closer to anything... so why do you think he is better? What criteria are you using... because you see him more on tv? Because he is your favorite player? Did he make the All-star team? Did he lead the league in any stats? Did he better Boozer in any category? How is he better?


----------



## ZBoFanatic (Feb 10, 2003)

strike one. zach will start this year.


----------



## ZBoFanatic (Feb 10, 2003)

look, it's basically been decided that the blazers are going to build around zach as their new nucleus for the team. when given the minutes he produces, and he wins. as a starter in the playoffs he averaged 21/10. he was inserted into the starting lineup after going down 3-0 to dallas, and tied the series up. i'm not ragging on boozer, but you all did throw out some facts that meant nothing. but basically with the way you've defended the situation, i think the season will be the best barometer.


----------



## Mongolmike (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ZBoFanatic</b>!
> strike one. zach will start this year.


Strike one. Over Rasheed? Not at this point in time. Not unless Sheed goes to the SF position, or a trade. And if he is traded for KMart... you telling me KMart is gonna sit on the bench behind Zach? Lol.... get real.

Ya know... the whole thing about this is funny. I haven't gone over to the Trailblazer's forum to see if there are any Cavs fans arguing that Boozer is better than Zach (maybe there are, I haven't looked).... you know why? You will say, because your boy is better.... and you'd be wrong again. The reason is, is that no CAVS FAN CARES ABOUT ZACH RANDOLPH! He is a nobody. A sub. Why should we care about him? If he starts for you guys, fine. We don't care! If you came in here and said, CWebb is better than Boozer.... ok, you'd be right. So what? Ben Wallace is a better PF than Boozer. Ok. Fine. So? You think bench warmer Zach is better than our starter Boozer. I don't agree, and I really don't even care about Zach. Hope he has a nice career, but I wouldn't trade Boozer for Zach. He is all yours. Keep him. Hope one day he can actually be a starter... maybe....lol.


----------



## ZBoFanatic (Feb 10, 2003)

zach and rasheed will both start. 1+1=2.


----------



## ZBoFanatic (Feb 10, 2003)

anyway, you proved my point, you're close minded and the season will speak for itself. bye.


----------



## Cam*Ron (Apr 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ZBoFanatic</b>!
> look, it's basically been decided that the blazers are going to build around zach as their new nucleus for the team.


Decided by who, the fans? If not go and get an article that says Zach will start and one that says you all will build around Zach.

If he and Rasheed both start at the 4 & 5 you won't see him do good in the playoffs again because you won't be there.


----------



## ZBoFanatic (Feb 10, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Bunk 22</b>!
> Decided by who, the fans? If not go and get an article that says Zach will start and one that says you all will build around Zach.
> 
> If he and Rasheed both start at the 4 & 5 you won't see him do good in the playoffs again because you won't be there.


it's been in articles, but here's the latest i could find. it's all in audio basically saying zach is the most untouchable player on the team because they think he's going to be an all-star.

http://www.oregonlive.com/blazers/index.ssf?/live/blazers/nash_081403.frame


----------



## Mongolmike (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ZBoFanatic</b>!
> anyway, you proved my point, you're close minded and the season will speak for itself. bye.


lol.... close minded??? LOL... that is funny. Your favorite player is Zach, and isn't your BB.net name "ZBo" Zach's nickname? You come into another teams forum and tell them that Zach is better, and when they don't agree, then you call THEM close minded?

I'd call you an appropriate name, but it would just get edited out. I also see that you have really no credibility in the TB's forum... so, yes.... say that we are close minded - and leave. Thanks for playing. 
:stupid:


----------



## ZBoFanatic (Feb 10, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Mongolmike</b>!
> The reason is, is that no CAVS FAN CARES ABOUT ZACH RANDOLPH! He is a nobody. A sub. Why should we care about him? If he starts for you guys, fine. We don't care!


dude, you're rediculous and you take your basketballboard presence to seriously

what would TB board credibility have to do w/ anything? i'm sorry that i don't have 1500 posts, oh my! i stated my opinion, but didn't bash yours and the only thing i got on you about was responding with crap like i quoted above. get over yourself.


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ZBoFanatic</b>!
> 
> 
> it's been in articles, but here's the latest i could find. it's all in audio basically saying zach is the most untouchable player on the team because they think he's going to be an all-star.
> ...


At 1 time Wallace was an all-star, if they built the team around him again, you won't say there is a chance for him to be an all-star again? 

-Petey


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ZBoFanatic</b>!
> zach and rasheed will both start. 1+1=2.


This is not proof he will start. Unless Zach is such an awesome player, heads and shoulders above Wallace don't you think they would start the more costly man? If not even to trade him?

-Petey


----------



## Siouxperior (Jan 15, 2003)

LoL, the reason why i started this thread was to see how many 'homer' answers I'd get from Cav fans. Even though i knew comparing Boozer to Randolph was like comparing Madsen to Amare lol. Even Cav fans on Realgm agreeed that Boozer isn't even on the same level as Randolph.


----------



## Vintage (Nov 8, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Siouxperior</b>!
> LoL, the reason why i started this thread was to see how many *'homer' answers* I'd get from Cav fans. Even though i knew comparing Boozer to Randolph was like comparing Madsen to Amare lol. Even Cav fans on Realgm agreeed that Boozer isn't even on the same level as Randolph.



I find that very ironic.....


----------



## TMOD (Oct 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Siouxperior</b>!
> LoL, the reason why i started this thread was to see how many 'homer' answers I'd get from Cav fans. Even though i knew comparing Boozer to Randolph was like comparing Madsen to Amare lol. Even Cav fans on Realgm agreeed that Boozer isn't even on the same level as Randolph.


How about you spell it out for me, because I don't see that kind of separation.


----------



## Vintage (Nov 8, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TMOD</b>!
> How about you spell it out for me, because I don't see that kind of separation.


Allow me to:

I wouldn't trade Zach for nobody 
Randolph has Tim Duncan potential 
Id be skeptical to trade Randolph for Garnett - Scroll to the bottom of the page.

This is what some Blazer fans think about Randolph.

So draw your conclusions from that....


----------



## Siouxperior (Jan 15, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Vintage</b>!
> 
> 
> Allow me to:
> ...


I wouldn't go that far with Zach, but he's worth keeping. This is kinda like Bull fans with Tyson Chandler, who some Bull fans think is the 2nd coming of Wilt Chamberland, when he looks more like Marcus Camby lol.


----------



## TMOD (Oct 12, 2002)

Funny thing is only thing I ever hear Bulls fans say is a bigger Marcus Camby, a more athletic Mutombo, and, "A future 15 and 12 defensive anchor," and the like. Lets stick to the issue.

Like I said, let me see your arguement, because right now, I don't see much of one.


----------



## RP McMurphy (Jul 17, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Vintage</b>!
> This is what some Blazer fans think about Randolph.
> 
> So draw your conclusions from that....





> Originally posted by some dumb Blazer homers:
> 
> - I wouldn't trade Zach for nobody
> - Randolph has Tim Duncan potential
> - Id be skeptical to trade Randolph for Garnett


:rotf:

Thanks. That just made my day.

You know, someone should start a thread called the Homer Thread. Every time some idiot makes a statement like this about some role player on their team being a future Top 5 Player, someone posts a link on the Homer Thread to the post where the homer was talking about how good the role player was. That way we could see how many players in the NBA are future Top 5 Players. According to these guys, maybe 100 people will be in the top 5 in a few years.


----------



## FanOfAll8472 (Jun 28, 2003)

Hehe, Mongolmike, I think you need to chill out  

I'm not biased in anyway (check name) and since the question was in 2 years, who will be better, I'll answer it in that way. I think Randolph will be the better player overall in two years, just looking at the stats, but Boozer will still have respectable stats. In addition, I feel as if Randolph will still be making mistakes that Boozer will not (turnovers, D), and Boozer will be better at D. That's two years.

Next year in particular, the Blazers could go Randolph and Wallace playing the 5 and 4, with Dale Davis coming off the bench. I feel as if Randolph will have be very up and down next year, but more up than down. He's never played full time for a complete season, so I think he'll wear down and the NBA will gradually get used to/find out more about his game (thus, making it harder for him to succeed). He'll hit a wall (my prediction) mid-way through the season, but will bounce back playoff time. Meanwhile, Boozer, who came as a senior, will endure a very steady year. I think his stats will be better than Randolph's next year.

Looking several years down the road (say 3-6), I think Randolph will be a franchise player. I said this when he was coming out of college and I say it again. He will take a while to adjust to the NBA (only 1 year of college ball), but after a few years, he will explode. Randolph never got much playing in the first few years, so we cant really judge upon that, but in the playing time that he has gotten, ZR has excelled (esp vs the Mavs last year in the *playoffs*). Using the same timeframe for Boozer, I think he'll be a very solid pf, but not a superstar (having lbj there doesnt help). I thought that Boozer was a steal, and his production has shown it. However, his play, to me, has also shown that he'll be a stud for his career (Again my prediction), but never make it to "blue."


----------



## Siouxperior (Jan 15, 2003)

http://www.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=164543



> Statistically, Randolph is the better PF, and overall, the same. Boozer is a solid PF, but not quite in the league of Zach.


 



> lets just say this. Randolph seems to have more potential than Boozer. Boozer is and will be a solid role player at PF. but Randolph has the potential to be a star.





> From an outsiders view, Zach Randolph is gonna be the better player. I've seen him play a few times, and he really impressed me. I wish the Wizards could get him.





> I think Randolph because of his offensive potential. He looks like he could be a big scorer around the basket and with his back to the basket which is a premium. I dont think Boozer is that kind of offensive player night in night out in the NBA.





> Nice to see that Carlos didn't get any homer votes. Randolph is already a pretty good player and I think he's going to evolve into a special offensive player very soon. Boozer is a solid starter, not a weapon at either end but a guy who's going to get you 10 and 8 every night, sometimes 18 and 14. Randolph will have his off nights where he gets 7 and 5, but his good nights he can get you 25 and 10. Give the D to Boozer because he understands positioning and footwork better on D and he can hang in there against bigger guys. As an erstwhile Blazer fan I sure hope Zach breaks out this year.


By ALL cav fans , except for two. Dare i say, 'smart' Cleveland fans?


----------



## TMOD (Oct 12, 2002)

'Potential...'
'Gonna be...'
'Could...'

Care to elaborate on these?

Still not much evidence.


----------



## Siouxperior (Jan 15, 2003)

The 'REAL' question ought to be:

















Samaki Walker vs. Carlos Boozer. Mirror images of each other Imho.


----------



## CavsTalk (Jun 10, 2003)

or












What uni will he end up in at the end of the year???:laugh:


----------



## The OUTLAW (Jun 13, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Siouxperior</b>!
> http://www.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=164543
> 
> 
> ...


But you didn't quote me? I guess it wasn't glowing enough for you. 

"Randolph has more potential than Boozer. Boozer is however a very solid player and I believe a better rebounder than Randolph. But offensively, Randolph is definitely better than Boozer."

I think that most people would agree that Randolph is the better offensive player now and has the potential to be a much better offensive player. But again that is potential. Boozer is solid, not flashy and while he will not give you the offensive production of a Randolph he is a very good player. For some reason Portland fans seem to have some fixation with comparing Randolph and Boozer. We Cleveland fans are just happy to have Boozer. I admit I am a homer and no I don't think that Boozer is the best pf in the NBA or in the east but he is a player who does the dirty work and fits in. He gets his points within the offense and he is a good rebounder. Whats not to like.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mongolmike</b>!
> R-Star tried that with a Pacers trade... and that didn't work either.


Not even close.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

I don't see why this is such a matter of hard feelings.

Seriously folks, get over it. It's perfectly ok for fans of other teams to post here if they're legitimately talking basketball.

As far as Randolph vs. Boozer, I honestly can't imagine that any GM in the league would pass on Randolph to take Boozer. It's no knock against the Carlos, but it just appears to me that Zach's got a lot more to work with than. If the Cavs had Rasheed Wallace, Boozer would be on the bench too. That being said, I think most every GM would like to have a player like Boozer as well.


----------



## FanOfAll8472 (Jun 28, 2003)

I think MikeDC put it nicely. I'm just stupid to type a long elaborate post.


----------



## CavsTalk (Jun 10, 2003)

I know teams that would pass on Randolph.

Teams that want to win now. That don't want to wait for his "potential". Boozer is what he is right now A solid 15/10 guay (when starting). Shoots above 50%, get's to the free throw line and knocks em down.

You can wait and see for what Randolph turns out to be, I would rather take the sure pick right now. 

Face it, Zach is too small to be a scoring PF, especially in the West. It won't take teams long to phase him out, I would rather have a strong role player that knows his role than an undersized scorer with potential.....anyday.


----------



## Mongolmike (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Vintage</b>!
> 
> 
> Allow me to:
> ...


????? LOL.... Oh my god.... is that what Blazerfan has to say about who.... Rasheed? What? They're saying that about Zach???? ROFLMAO.... ok, I get it now.... Siouxperior and ZBo are coming in here to make a joke..... ho, ho, ho. That is true close-mindedness...... man..... :laugh:


----------



## Mongolmike (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TMOD</b>!
> Funny thing is only thing I ever hear Bulls fans say is a bigger Marcus Camby, a more athletic Mutombo, and, "A future 15 and 12 defensive anchor," and the like. Lets stick to the issue.
> 
> Like I said, let me see your arguement, because right now, I don't see much of one.


Right on TMOD. I see you don't proclaim allegiance to either Clev or Port... so you, in my opinion have nothing to gain. I agree... where is the argument.....


----------



## Mongolmike (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>FanOfAll8472</b>!
> Hehe, Mongolmike, I think you need to chill out


just a little give and take.... thing is, I don't go into other teams forums and propose stupid trades, or call them a homer when I'm trying to tell them my guy is better than theirs. It's all good on my end.... you should see me why I get really worked up about something!:laugh: 

And for your post.... ok, your opinion is cool.... again, I may not agree 100%, but at least you can type a coherent thought and try to sway others to your view! 

Like I said before (either in this thread, or the other thread Siouxperior tried to push Zach).... this subject is subjective. Unless you could transplant Zach to Clev, and Booz to Port, you can't say one is clearly better than the other. But, stats are a means to evaluate... and in terms of stats, and in terms of value to their team, Boozer is CLEARLY better as a rookie than Zach as a 2nd year player, and Boozer clearly had a more significant role for Clev last season than Zach did. One is a starter, one is a sub.


----------



## Mongolmike (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TMOD</b>!
> 'Potential...'
> 'Gonna be...'
> 'Could...'
> ...


you forgot they said "statistically" also. Not sure what statistics they are refering to, but they (Zach fans) do like to refer to his success for 3 games in the playoffs or something. So, using a 3 game criteria, he is apparently better than Duncan, Garnett, etc.

We already covered regular season stats, and Boozer clearly has better stats... in fact, he has better total stats in one year (playing only the 2nd half of the season as the starter) then Zach does in two full seasons. But the potential is there.....:uhoh:


----------



## Mongolmike (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>The OUTLAW</b>!
> 
> 
> We Cleveland fans are just happy to have Boozer. I admit I am a homer and no I don't think that Boozer is the best pf in the NBA or in the east but he is a player who does the dirty work and fits in. He gets his points within the offense and he is a good rebounder. Whats not to like.


Right on.... I'm a homer too... proud of it... very glad we have Boozer, and wouldn't give him to Port straight up for Zach.


----------



## TMOD (Oct 12, 2002)

How come the word potential is being thrown around so much more with Zach when Boozer is 4 months younger? I think people should at least acknowledge the fact that he too could improve _a lot_...he already has the prototypical power forward body and mentality.


----------



## Mongolmike (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>R-Star</b>!
> 
> 
> Not even close.




IIIIIEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!! It's the devil!!! Flee!!!!! Fleeeeee!!!!!:devil2:

(must........avert..........eyes........ignore.........the pain......flee)


----------



## FanOfAll8472 (Jun 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Mongolmike</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


rofl :laugh:. Ya know, there's an edit button somewhere along the panel too  just a tip


----------



## Nmage (Aug 19, 2003)

With all the scoring Cleveland has now, especially with Lebron James and not to mention Big Z in the middle, Boozer is the perfect PF for that team.

Zach may have to always have a bench role in the West because of his size. But that too can be an important role - instant offense off the bench.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>CavsTalk</b>!
> Teams that want to win now. That don't want to wait for his "potential". Boozer is what he is right now A solid 15/10 guay (when starting). Shoots above 50%, get's to the free throw line and knocks em down.


But did you look at Zach's numbers when starting?

Zach: (11 starts): 55% fg%, 15.5 ppg, 8.0 rpg
Carlos (54 starts): 54% fg% 11.8 ppg, 8.9rpg

Obviously Boozer started more playing for the Cavs then Zach did, but as starters they are fairly comparable right now.

In general, it's one thing to be a homer in the sense that you like your team. It's totally another to be a homer in the sense that you can't think objectively about it and how it could be made better. Maintaining an objective perspective doesn't mean you aren't a fan


----------



## FanOfAll8472 (Jun 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Nmage</b>!
> With all the scoring Cleveland has now, especially with Lebron James and not to mention Big Z in the middle, Boozer is the perfect PF for that team.
> 
> Zach may have to always have a bench role in the West because of his size. But that too can be an important role - instant offense off the bench.


Nmage, ZBo is quite a big guy. Coming out of college he was 6'9" or 10" and about 250. He's still that. That's pretty big.


----------



## Mongolmike (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> 
> 
> But did you look at Zach's numbers when starting?
> ...


Talking of "homers" and "perspective".... take a look at the thread in the main NBA Forum titled "Top 25 PF's" (or something along that line).

Of all the lists people (mostly non Blazer or non Cavs fans) posted of their top 25 PF's.... Boozer has been rated higher than Zach every list. In fact, Zach is not even ON the initial poster's list, (and of course Boozer IS listed). So we may be homers in here, but apparently many other non-Cavs fans/non- Blazer fans feel Boozer is a better PF than Zach... this after only one season by Boozer.

Oh, and I would love to see the Blazer fan go into that thread and say that they wouldn't trade Zach for Duncan, or KG, etc. like was copied into this thread. Methinks many "neutral" observers would have a bit of opposition to the Blazer homers! Come on Sioux, Fan, etc... go into that thread and tell them all that you think Zach should be listed as one of the top ten PF's in the show....


----------



## ZBoFanatic (Feb 10, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Mongolmike</b>!
> 
> 
> Talking of "homers" and "perspective".... take a look at the thread in the main NBA Forum titled "Top 25 PF's" (or something along that line).
> ...


maybe youre talking about a different top 25 list thread, but the one up right now only has one other person listing their top 25 and had carlos at 23 and zach at 25. everyone else didnt go past top 10 until profanity had zach at 15 at the end and didn't list carlos... are you talking about a different thready?


----------



## Siouxperior (Jan 15, 2003)

ontop of that, Carlos puts up avg. numbers in the JV East. Honestly, this is like comparing Amare Stoudemire to Bo Outlaw. Not even close, Boozer is solid, a Journeyman type player, does NOTHING well, but will do some of the dirty work. Has no O, avg D, With that roster pre-Bron, who was the 2nd option? This year, with Dejuan coming into his own, Ricky Davis, LeBron, and the bulked up D.Miles, there will be NO shots for Carlos, will probably avg something like 5 ppg 7 rpg. [sarcasm]Not like it matters, he has a vast array of low post moves [/sarcasm]


----------



## The OUTLAW (Jun 13, 2002)

Boozer was not the second option on the Cavs last year. It was more like Z, Davis and after that pretty much a free for all. Remember the Cavs had absolutely horrible PG play last year. Frankly I don't even see why you guys who are clearly Portland fans come to the Cleveland site to talk about Randolph. It doesn't make any sense. I think that Boozer have numbers more in line with 15 and 9 (heck he didn't even start until more than half the season was over last year and he was in the neighborhood). What we need from Boozer is interior passing between him and Z and finishing close to the basket and to be able to knock down the 10-15ft jump shot (all three of which of which he showed the ability to do last year). No those are not superstar number but they are good numbers. Randolph is not a Cavalier but frankly if he were I'm not sure that he would average any more than that either.


----------



## CavsTalk (Jun 10, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Siouxperior</b>!
> ontop of that, Carlos puts up avg. numbers in the JV East. Honestly, this is like comparing Amare Stoudemire to Bo Outlaw. Not even close, Boozer is solid, a Journeyman type player, does NOTHING well, but will do some of the dirty work. Has no O, avg D, With that roster pre-Bron, who was the 2nd option? This year, with Dejuan coming into his own, Ricky Davis, LeBron, and the bulked up D.Miles, there will be NO shots for Carlos, will probably avg something like 5 ppg 7 rpg. [sarcasm]Not like it matters, he has a vast array of low post moves [/sarcasm]


Funny how a guy who does nothing well has better stats as a rookie than a second year guy who some wouldn't trade for Tim Duncan or Kevin Garnett.

Get serious. Zach isn't even an option in Portland. If he was, he would be playing more minutes than he does, regardless if Wallace is there or not. He gets the ***** mintues, because basically he isnt any better than that.

You can come over here and battle with us all you want, it really doesn't matter. You are getting no where but yet you keep rambling pulling out useless garbage.


----------



## Siouxperior (Jan 15, 2003)

As a starter in the playoffs (4 games) (playoffs, you know, were all the good teams get together and play for a title, oh sorry, i know it's been so long for your team lol) 21 ppg 11 rpg. Boozer is a journeyman type player, plain and simple.


----------



## CavsTalk (Jun 10, 2003)

A journeyman who has better stats than your player. :laugh: :laugh: 

You sound stupid.


----------



## FanOfAll8472 (Jun 28, 2003)

Sioux, I think journeyman is harsh.


----------



## double3peat (Aug 18, 2003)

> Zach hasn't brought your team closer to anything...


Umm am i dumb or did Zach not win 3 games for Portland against Dallas almsot making Portland the first team to ever come out of 0-3?

I mean I dotn expecially like either team but Zach will def. be a better player next year. He stpeped up big time in the playoffs and showed the Blazers he deserves the minutes. Boozer only got his minuted because he was on the team that tied for second worst in the league...Altough I think Boozer is a average player i dont think he'd do any better then Zach did i f he played on a team w/ Rasheed.


----------



## Siouxperior (Jan 15, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>double3peat</b>!
> 
> 
> *Umm am i dumb or did Zach not win 3 games for Portland against Dallas almsot making Portland the first team to ever come out of 0-3?*
> ...


Amen. As a starter he was a 20/11 player, while shooting over 50% and playing good D. What did Boozer do? The only positive thing I can think of...He helped Cleveland land LeBron James  If Boozer was in Portland, he'd be getting Ruben Boumtje-Boumtje p/t


----------



## CavsTalk (Jun 10, 2003)

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: 

You guys are a joke.....everytime you place a stat with Zach, it goes up. Get the real stats.

Zach wont do anything special, they will have about the same stats.


----------



## Starbury03 (Aug 12, 2003)

Zach will be an all-star in the future when sheeds contract comes of the blocks


----------



## Siouxperior (Jan 15, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>CavsTalk</b>!
> :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
> 
> You guys are a joke.....everytime you place a stat with Zach, it goes up. *Get the real stats.*
> ...


G4 - 25 pts 15 rebs
G5 - 22 pts 9 rebs
G6 - 21 pts 10 rebs
G7 - 14 pts 10 rebs

20.5 ppg 11.0 rpg





> Randolph led the Blazers in scoring the last two games, getting 25 points in Game 4 and 22 in Game 5. He even led Portland in rebounding in those games, the only two playoff games they have won in three seasons. In the first three games of the series, when Randolph barely played, Dallas rolled and was on the verge of a sweep. Since then, Randolph has averaged 23.5 points and 12 rebounds and made the Mavs very nervous.
> 
> "I had to be sure our guys were up and feeling good about themselves," Dallas coach Don Nelson told the Morning News. "We were down a little bit this morning, but that'll pass and we'll be ready to play."
> 
> Of course, he's talking about tonight, when the highest paid team in the league will play the third-highest paid team in the league, and it might all come down to the guy making $1.1 million.


Link

From game 4 on, nobody was saying " Who's going to stop Dirk" or "Who's going to stop 'Sheed?" It was "Who will try to contain Zach Randolph" What can you say about Boozer? .....you can say he was a somewhat steal, of the 2nd round, But that's about it.


----------



## FanOfAll8472 (Jun 28, 2003)

Why dont we just all come back at the end of next season and taunt/flame each other that one or the other were right? I mean, what's the point of flaming people when you are baseless...(btw this isnt aimed towards anyone in particular)

btw, i love that 'Sheed quote Sioux


----------



## ZBoFanatic (Feb 10, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>FanOfAll8472</b>!
> Why dont we just all come back at the end of next season


i agree!


----------



## -33- (Aug 6, 2002)

Zach > Boozer


----------



## Mongolmike (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Caron_Butler</b>!
> Zach > Boozer


Boozer > Brian Grant


----------



## Knicksbiggestfan (Apr 29, 2003)

I seriously can't believe this thread went 5 pages long. Boozer is a good player, certainly, and he is willing to give you effort and hardnosed play but come on, better than Zach Randolph? 

He is a good rebounder, but he does play in the east and when he goes against west coast teams his numbers do drop ( save for denver)

Zach Randolph is incredibly productive with his limited minutes, which by the way are around 40% of Carlos's. He is also much more versatile and he is bigger and more atheletic, I am not knocking boozer I think he was a great steal, but he is certainly not someone you build around, while Zach randolph is.


----------



## The OUTLAW (Jun 13, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Knicksbiggestfan</b>!
> I seriously can't believe this thread went 5 pages long. Boozer is a good player, certainly, and he is willing to give you effort and hardnosed play but come on, better than Zach Randolph?
> 
> He is a good rebounder, but he does play in the east and when he goes against west coast teams his numbers do drop ( save for denver)
> ...


Whats funny is that I don't even think one Cavs fan has said that Boozer is better than Randolph. We just don't believe that Randolph is a basketball god and Boozer is crap which is what others in this thread seem to believe without actually being able to back it up with any evidence whatsoever. For the most part Boozers numbers stay about the same regardless of whether he plays against east or west teams (please show me your evidence to the contrary). In addition you mention that Randolph is bigger than Boozer. They are both 6'9" and Boozer weighs 259 to Randolph's 253, while Randolph may be stronger, I would question that because of the fact the Boozer is cut like a piece of granite. But yes this thread is probably 4 pages longer than it needs to be. Again it will all be decided on the court.


----------



## Knicksbiggestfan (Apr 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>The OUTLAW</b>!
> 
> 
> Whats funny is that I don't even think one Cavs fan has said that Boozer is better than Randolph. We just don't believe that Randolph is a basketball god and Boozer is crap which is what others in this thread seem to believe without actually being able to back it up with any evidence whatsoever. For the most part Boozers numbers stay about the same regardless of whether he plays against east or west teams (please show me your evidence to the contrary). In addition you mention that Randolph is bigger than Boozer. They are both 6'9" and Boozer weighs 259 to Randolph's 253, while Randolph may be stronger, I would question that because of the fact the Boozer is cut like a piece of granite. But yes this thread is probably 4 pages longer than it needs to be. Again it will all be decided on the court.



I always thought Zach was around 6'10 and carlos 6'8 apparently I am wrong. In my humble defense I have watched boozer play in person and not Zach, and he did look short around 6'8 or so. I don't know about strength but my argument was in athleticism and versatility, Zach just flat out shows a better aray of skills than boozer does.


Here is my evidence regarding boozers decline:


Arrgh stupid formatting


http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/gamelog?statsId=3632


You'll notice a trend of his rebounding dropping signifigantly the majority of the time he plays west coast teams. To his credit though his scoring average remains steady, however, he is the second option on his team when Z is not injured. Again I am not knocking him here, I think on the cavs he should get his touches as he is a banger who can deliver in the post however, unlike Zach, he really doesn't try to involve his teammates, or at least he didn't last year. I would make the argument that he does not possess the vision and know how to make succesful passess out of the post, but of course as a second option on his team, you could argue that it was primary role to score. The cavs looked so disjointed last year it was hard to tell what the hell they were doing.


As you say though, it will be settled this year.


----------



## RoyWilliams (May 25, 2003)

Boozer is soft, and that is coming from a Duke fan, im going to go with Randolph.


----------



## The OUTLAW (Jun 13, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Knicksbiggestfan</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Boozer is not the second option when he is on the floor. To even say that tells me that you didn't watch the Cavs play last year. Boozer was not even getting alot of playing time the first half of the season. And almost never was he one of the primary options on offense. In fact up until the very end of the season I don't recall the Cavs ever running a play to get Boozer the ball. He was about the 4th or 5th option most of the year, at least partly do to the poor point guard play last year. But you guys are truly free to believe what you want. Most Cavs fans actually like Boozer. He showed a tremendous amount of heart last year.


----------



## Sportarium (Sep 3, 2003)

I think both players have the chance to have an amazing career, I just don't get comparing players, because its usually filled with biased opinions. I would be happy with either player being my starting power forward..can't we just leave it at that?


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

*Boozer* Per 48 minutes: 19.0 ppg *14.3* rpg *2.5 apg*
*Randolph* Per 48 minutes:*24.0 ppg* 12.7 rpg 1.5 apg

*Boozer* Post All-Star Break: *12.0 ppg* *9.4 rpg* *1.8 apg* *28 mpg*
*Randolph* Post All-Star Break: 10.0 ppg 5.4 rpg 0.7 apg 19mpg

*Boozer* vs. Portland: 10.5 ppg *9.0 rpg* *1.5 apg* *26.5 mpg*
*Randolph* vs. Cleveland: *12.0 ppg* 5.5 rpg 0.0 apg 20.5 mpg


----------



## FanOfAll8472 (Jun 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Sportarium</b>!
> I think both players have the chance to have an amazing career, I just don't get comparing players, because its usually filled with biased opinions. I would be happy with either player being my starting power forward..can't we just leave it at that?


Yes.


----------



## Draco (Jun 28, 2003)

Boozer was a steal for Cleveland and he had a great year last year. I'd expect him to improve and do a good job of holding down the PF spot for years to come. I don't think he'll ever be a go to guy who can carry a team but he should fit in nicely with a team who has other scorers.

Zack was on a better team in a better conference last year but made huge strides as the season went on and especially in the playoffs. Zack is basically the only untouchable player on the Blazer roster and he is more highly regarded among management and fans than the blazers best player the last few years, Sheed. GM Nash even said he is basically the only untouchable player.

Obviously Zack isn't close to Duncan/Garnett level and the blazers would do a trade like that in a hearbeat but he does have lots of upside and skills that Boozer will never have. Zack could become an All-Star and carry a team but Boozer won't be better than an average starter. Zack is definetly a worse defender than Boozer and that is Zacks biggest weakness.

I think when you judge players you have to look at their situation they were in too, Zack was on a team with as many wins as Minnesota and LAL. Zack carried the team that was a half away from being the first 0-3 team to come back. Cleveland was the worst team in the league in the JV conference.

See what Hoopsworld thought of Zack: Ten Breakout Candidates by Hoopsworld


----------



## ZBoFanatic (Feb 10, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Draco</b>!
> Boozer was a steal for Cleveland and he had a great year last year. I'd expect him to improve and do a good job of holding down the PF spot for years to come. I don't think he'll ever be a go to guy who can carry a team but he should fit in nicely with a team who has other scorers.
> 
> Zack was on a better team in a better conference last year but made huge strides as the season went on and especially in the playoffs. Zack is basically the only untouchable player on the Blazer roster and he is more highly regarded among management and fans than the blazers best player the last few years, Sheed. GM Nash even said he is basically the only untouchable player.
> ...


i love the post man, but its ZACH not zack!! :grinning:


----------



## FanOfAll8472 (Jun 28, 2003)

I like the post also. However, I Booz will become more than just an average player. In addition, I wouldn't called the Leastern Conference the JV team. That's a bit too harsh, but point taken.


----------



## Sportarium (Sep 3, 2003)

With LeBron and all this tv time we have now, people will actually see Boozer play.

Then we will hear a different story, count on it.


----------

