# OT:Report - Lakers get Boozer!



## bullet (Jul 1, 2003)

> Fox Sports Net's Jack Haley is reporting the Lakers will trade Vlade Divac, Caron Butler and Devean George to the Utah Jazz in exchange for big man Carlos Boozer, pending league approval


http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/3410834

Lakers got seriously stronger I the paint.

Will they play Odom,Boozer and Mihm together - very strong rebounding team.Good deal from lakers side.


----------



## Marcus13 (Jul 17, 2002)

Pretty good trade for both squads. However, I like it more for Utah as I think Butler will be just as good as Carlos has been for them.


----------



## SecretAgentGuy (Jul 15, 2003)

WOW.

Does this make the Lakers legit contenders?


----------



## Kay-Jay (Feb 21, 2005)

i really dont think that this trade would change the lakers much at all


----------



## T.Shock (Feb 11, 2003)

I feel like this is a terrible trade for the Jazz. Why give up Boozer who is right now your second best player for an aging Vlade Divac, Caron Butler who is legit but plays the same positions as Matt Harpring and Devean George who only looks good when playing with superior players. But hey Kupchak showing he still has some skills.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

I really don't think that this makes the Lakers a title defender, but definitely a playoff team. Good trade by the Lakers.


----------



## CoachJackson (Jan 22, 2005)

I really like this deal for Lakers although I think Odom still needs to be moved at some point, not a good fit there at all. Utah I wonder if this moves AK47 to PF. Also with Butler and George there that makes Harpring expendable. I would like to see him at SG for us. Maybe they take some of our expiring contracts? Frank, Pargo,Reiner,Griffin?????? Any combo of those would be fine with me


----------



## BealeFarange (May 22, 2004)

I'm with T.Shock. I think this is a good deal for the Lakers...though the character ramifications of Boozer/Kobe on the same team...who doesn't want to see a Cleveland/LA finals now? Heh.

I don't really see how this helps the Odom+Kobe issue (both need the ball!) but I just don't see Divac/Butler/George as having a ton of value. Butler is overrated, in my opinion, at least since his injury and George is so-so. Divac...well...he must be loving this season.


----------



## bullet (Jul 1, 2003)

How about that - Jazz trading Boozer the same year they sign him for a longturmer...

What does that say about the guy - they really wanted to get rid of him , and just looked for the best deal possible.

Now at 2/3 Jazz have Caron/George/Harpering/Bell/snyder/Giricek (and possibly AK at 3 too)

Can we try and get Snyder from them (they need a PG since theres r injured or not playing as Jerry asks them to)

Duhon+FW for Snyder anyone???


----------



## bullet (Jul 1, 2003)

T.Shock said:


> I feel like this is a terrible trade for the Jazz. Why give up Boozer who is right now your second best player for an aging Vlade Divac, Caron Butler who is legit but plays the same positions as Matt Harpring and Devean George who only looks good when playing with superior players. But hey Kupchak showing he still has some skills.


The only explenation is character - they really wanted to get rid of him , as I see it.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

bullet said:


> The only explenation is character - they really wanted to get rid of him , as I see it.


Buyer beware. This doesn't surpise me in the least given the display of Boozer's true colors this summer.


----------



## bullet (Jul 1, 2003)

Ron Cey said:


> Buyer beware. This doesn't surpise me in the least given the display of Boozer's true colors this summer.


Yup.

Now all they need is Coach Phil to come back and make all the 'characters' play together...


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

bullet said:


> How about that - Jazz trading Boozer the same year they sign him for a longturmer...
> 
> What does that say about the guy - they really wanted to get rid of him , and just looked for the best deal possible.


Pretty much says they wanted no part of him.



> Now at 2/3 Jazz have Caron/George/Harpering/Bell/snyder/Giricek (and possibly AK at 3 too)
> 
> Can we try and get Snyder from them (they need a PG since theres r injured or not playing as Jerry asks them to)
> 
> Duhon+FW for Snyder anyone???


I dunno about that though. I bet the guy they're hedging against is Raja Bell, who's gonna be a FA. 

They could probably play Harpring/George at the 3 and let Butler play the 2 with Snyder backing him up down the road.

Or, you could be right and they've got a deal lined up for one of them other guys.

I can see the logic of the Bulls making a run at one of them- Snyder, Bell, or Harpring.


----------



## The Truth (Jul 22, 2002)

There are some major questions as to the validity of this trade...

I'd say we should wait and see.

Apparently Haley has been reporting this trade for a while (and he is the only one reporting the trade). Everyone on the Lakers board has been going crazy about this.


----------



## The Truth (Jul 22, 2002)

What exactly are the character problems that have been an issue between Boozer and the Jazz?


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

i dont think it was character as much as it was personal and financial.

Boozer is not a superstar , but he was getting paid like one, plus larry miller has already been _rumored_ to say that boozer didn't play all out ( a claim I never thought for a moment was true) although he was no longer as maniacal as he was before on the court he was a big time (or bigger time) scorer for them , he really did have to conserve energy because they tried to squeeze a superstar out of a place where there wasn't one.

he is just a really good player , but the moment he signed that contract he was overpaid, he was never that good a defender a sloan neccesity.

butler is a better fit, george is most likely a trade chip and vlade is finished, in the end this deal is about the jazz cutting their losses and boozer going back to what he was , a rebounder who scored , not the other way around, a scorer who rebounded.

the jazz is too small market a team to pay for a superstar when he isn't one.


----------



## bullsville (Jan 23, 2005)

Odom, Boozer, Kobe and Brian Grant all make over $10 million this season, and all 4 are signed through 2006-07 at the least. I can't see them standing pat, there was talk all weekend about Odom being on the block. Maybe we can put together a package for Odom.

Curry, Pike, Pargo, FWill, Griffin
for 
Odom

Curry, Pike, Harrington, FWill
for
Odom, Brian Cook

Both work salary-wise, and Odom gives us a good post-up presence on offense who will actually rebound as well. I think Odom is the kind of PF Pax is looking for.


----------



## bullet (Jul 1, 2003)

Mikedc said:


> Pretty much says they wanted no part of him.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Mike , I started this with it's own thread.

and U forgot about Giricek who will also play ahead of Snyder.He will hardly play.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

bullet said:


> How about that - Jazz trading Boozer the same year they sign him for a longturmer...
> 
> What does that say about the guy - they really wanted to get rid of him , and just looked for the best deal possible.
> 
> ...


As I alluded to in the other thread:

SG: Giricek, Snyder, Bell (expiring)
SF: Butler, Harpring, George (next year he's expiring, but he does have a player option I think)
PF: Kirilenko, Humphries, Borchardt

The logjam isn't too bad when you think about it. Harpring's future may be coming to close in Utah as well.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

Now Kobe has 2 "Dream Team" type players as teammates.

If he's one of the best in the NBA, he should be able to make a run deep into the playoffs with that squad.

Lakers vs Heat in the Finals would be epic.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Even though this move caps out the Lakers for a long time, it may pay large dividends. There's alot of talent between their new big 3: Kobe, Odom, and Boozer. Boozer should fit well as he returns to the role he played last year. I'm still not convinced that the chemistry is there to make a big playoff run, but if Kobe actually stops trying to run a one-man show, then you never know. I hate the Lakers, but I admit that a Lakers-Heat Finals would be hilariously epic. (Too bad for them, the Spurs will just be too much to overcome.)


----------



## ChiBulls2315 (Aug 11, 2002)

WOW. Nice trade for the Lakers. 

Now they can move Odom to the 3 fulltime and not worry about minutes with Butler there and get a good bigman. 

Heh Boozer. Karma baby. :biggrin:


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

This is a good trade ONLY if Kobe treats him as something more than Dennis Rodman.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

I doubt it was as much Boozer's character as his massive contract which Utah has figured out is quite a bit over his value.

I think Utah's owner complained about dumping so much money into Okur and Boozer and neither being anything close to a franchise player.

Cleveland looks like it lucked out in losing Boozer.

Gooden+Verejao>Boozer

As far as the two teams invovled. Boozer isn't very good defensively. So that problem still exists for the Lakers. They'll be better on the offensive glass. But they are still undersized up front.

Expect Odom to get traded next. Possibly for Peja.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

i think this trade helped 2 team alot , the jazz found out they are better with AK-47 at the 4 and got a good 3 to play with him.

the lakers got a rebounding 4 so odom can go back to his natural position small forward....the bulls should inquire about raja bell not snyder , bell can play serious minutes now , and he fits the bill to a tee what the bulls need.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

Peja too?



> The other thought out there is that the Lakers would consider moving Lamar Odom to Sacramento for Peja Stojakovic, who has not retracted his pre-season trade request and isn't performing up to his usual standards.


http://nuno.typepad.com/nbafanblog/2005/02/are_the_lakers_.html

Heart problems:



> Boozer himself has been questioned by the team owner recently. The owner made remarks questioning Boozer’s heart and ability to step up and lead when his team most needs him. This is quite the hit.


http://nuno.typepad.com/nbafanblog/2005/02/mid_season_nort_4.html


----------



## Kismet (Mar 1, 2003)

I'm sure there are several factors involved, but from Utah's point of view this is first and foremost a salary dump trade. When they realized he wasn't worth what they paid him, the Jazz simply dumped him.

Boozer is signed through the 09/10 season. George and Divac come off the Jazz' books after the 05/06 season. Butler's in the third year of his rookie contract that shows him earning a paltry $ 1.9 million this season.

George hasn't played all season and Divac has played in just 8 games. Both are currently on the IL. If either of them are even close to being ready to play its more likely they'll be traded again by Utah before they'll ever wear a Jazz uni.

Even Butler is far from anything special. He's your average, run-of-the-mill journeyman SF who's just became a member of his third team in two and a half seasons. How many minutes do you think he'll get sharing the swing positions with Kirilenko, Harpring, Giricek, Bell and Snyder? Hell, Butler might even be traded again before Thursday's deadline as well.

This was nothing more that financial relief for Utah because from the start of the season they never really got over a bad case of buyer's remorse.


----------



## bullet (Jul 1, 2003)

happygrinch said:


> i think this trade helped 2 team alot , the jazz found out they are better with AK-47 at the 4 and got a good 3 to play with him.
> 
> the lakers got a rebounding 4 so odom can go back to his natural position small forward....the bulls should inquire about raja bell not snyder , bell can play serious minutes now , and he fits the bill to a tee what the bulls need.



well , I prefer Snyder , but Raja Bell would also be nice , I like him as well.


----------



## ChiBulls2315 (Aug 11, 2002)

Vlade and George's contracts don't even expire unless they opt out this summer. And Vlade is old so that might be up in air as far as him getting the same money on the market and George hasn't even played all year to opt out and hope for a nice contract. 

And even if they do, with Butler there, the Jazz are only going to have like 7 million to go after free agents with, probably less with draft picks. 

Was this really worth it? They couldn't have waited and hoped for something better? I mean Boozer's value is at a serious low point right now with the owner calling him out and all.


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

I guess the 761 sportswriters who bashed and ridiculed Jim Paxson and Gordon Gund for losing the omnipotent Boozer will be writing their mea culpas over the next couple days . . . 

. . . or not.


----------



## bullsville (Jan 23, 2005)

Chicago trades:
C Eddy Curry (15.9 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 0.7 apg in 29.5 minutes) 
PF Othella Harrington (6.7 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 0.8 apg in 16.8 minutes) 
SG Eric Piatkowski (4.3 ppg, 1.0 rpg, 0.7 apg in 11.6 minutes) 

Chicago receives: 
PF Lamar Odom (15.7 ppg, 10.3 rpg, 3.5 apg in 36.4 minutes) 
Change in team outlook: -11.2 ppg, +0.5 rpg, and +1.3 apg. 

L.A. Lakers trades: 
PF Lamar Odom (15.7 ppg, 10.3 rpg, 3.5 apg in 36.4 minutes) 

L.A. Lakers receives: 
SF Peja Stojakovic (19.7 ppg, 4.2 rpg, 1.9 apg in 38.3 minutes) 
PG Bobby Jackson (11.9 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 2.3 apg in 21.7 minutes) 
Change in team outlook: +15.9 ppg, -2.8 rpg, and +0.7 apg. 

Sacramento trades: 
SF Peja Stojakovic (19.7 ppg, 4.2 rpg, 1.9 apg in 38.3 minutes) 
PG Bobby Jackson (11.9 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 2.3 apg in 21.7 minutes) 

Sacramento receives: 
C Eddy Curry (15.9 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 0.7 apg in 29.5 minutes) 
PF Othella Harrington (6.7 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 0.8 apg in 16.8 minutes) 
SG Eric Piatkowski (4.3 ppg, 1.0 rpg, 0.7 apg in 11.6 minutes) 
Change in team outlook: -4.7 ppg, +2.3 rpg, and -2.0 apg. 

TRADE ACCEPTED


----------



## The Gipper (Dec 27, 2004)

This is a terrible deal for the Lakers for one huge reason. What it does to their cap. 

I've had arguments with Laker fans where I'm like "you guys are capped out through the end of the 2007 season when you lose Brian Grant." And that's if you don't RE-SIGN ANYONE. Now, unless the Lakers move Grant (LOL yeah right) or Odom (who they wouldn't get value for) they're capped out through the end of the *2009 season*. Also...say they move Odom for an expiring contract so that after 2007 they can get under the cap and make a move in the summer of 2007....they're taking a big step back. You're going to spend 3 years with Odom, build chemistry and then basically be forced to move him so that you can bring in another guy who will make his salary. It's just swapping. The Lakers are not in a position to better themselves tremendously, barring a luckout in the lottery, until summer 2009.

Also...how good is Boozer really? Yeah he looked great in Cleveland with Lebron, then when he went to Utah he went right back to being the guy that everyone thought he would be when he got drafted where he was drafted. 

Caron Butler is as good of a player, though he forces Odom out of position, BUT Butler comes at a much cheaper price than Boozer, for now. 

Also what does this say about Utah. Think Larry Miller is starting to think that he made some serious spending errors recently?


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

looks like a pure salary dump to me. Speaking of the Jazz that is. It is obvious LA is not finished. Odom will be moved. Why? He and Kobe demand the ball and their is just one ball in LA, Kobe's. 

If they don't move Odom, then I would be puzzled at what the Lakers are really trying to do.


----------



## bullsville (Jan 23, 2005)

truebluefan said:


> looks like a pure salary dump to me. Speaking of the Jazz that is. It is obvious LA is not finished. Odom will be moved. Why? He and Kobe demand the ball and their is just one ball in LA, Kobe's.
> 
> If they don't move Odom, then I would be puzzled at what the Lakers are really trying to do.


Odom and Kobe just don't fit together, like you said Odom is most effective with the ball in his hands, and Kobe isn't giving up the rock very often these days.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

truebluefan said:


> looks like a pure salary dump to me. Speaking of the Jazz that is. It is obvious LA is not finished. Odom will be moved. Why? He and Kobe demand the ball and their is just one ball in LA, Kobe's.
> 
> If they don't move Odom, then I would be puzzled at what the Lakers are really trying to do.


This is partially true. Yes Kobe needs the ball, but the problem with Odom is, he is worthless without the ball. He doesn't move without it, he doesn't shoot it very well and he can bog down an offense with his overdribbling. Odom is like Sir Patchwork likes to say, a stopgap solution, but he is not a star, yet needs a star's type of system for his game.


----------



## tiredchick (Oct 20, 2003)

Um...hello? Guys, this is nothing more than a RUMOR. It is far from being a done deal. The Lakers are denying that they are going to trade Odom, either for Boozer or for Stojakovic. The Jazz and the Kings are also denying these reports. Of course, that doesn't mean that nothing will happen before the Thursday deadline, but many of you are acting like the trade has already gone through!


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

Hong Kong Fooey said:


> This is partially true. Yes Kobe needs the ball, but the problem with Odom is, he is worthless without the ball. He doesn't move without it, he doesn't shoot it very well and he can bog down an offense with his overdribbling. Odom is like Sir Patchwork likes to say, a stopgap solution, but he is not a star, yet needs a star's type of system for his game.


Right on as usual HKF. I agree.


----------



## ChiBulls2315 (Aug 11, 2002)

The Gipper said:


> *This is a terrible deal for the Lakers for one huge reason. What it does to their cap. *
> 
> I've had arguments with Laker fans where I'm like "you guys are capped out through the end of the 2007 season when you lose Brian Grant." And that's if you don't RE-SIGN ANYONE. Now, unless the Lakers move Grant (LOL yeah right) or Odom (who they wouldn't get value for) they're capped out through the end of the *2009 season*. Also...say they move Odom for an expiring contract so that after 2007 they can get under the cap and make a move in the summer of 2007....they're taking a big step back. You're going to spend 3 years with Odom, build chemistry and then basically be forced to move him so that you can bring in another guy who will make his salary. It's just swapping. The Lakers are not in a position to better themselves tremendously, barring a luckout in the lottery, until summer 2009.
> 
> ...



I disagree. If they keep what they have now, they only way they can be under the cap anytime soon is by dealing Grant for a guy with a year less on his contract AND really just giving up Odom for an expiring contract, which would just be a terrible idea. You seem to realize that. 

Even if they just dumped Grant for someone with a year less on his deal to "try" to get under the cap in 2006, it's basically impossible to do so b/c they have 30 million tied up in Kobe and Odom alone that year. There's no way they're going to have no one else under contract that year. That is, unless you just want to deal off the rest of the pieces they have for nothing and just let Caron Butler walk. 

The only real piece they're giving up here to get Booz is Butler, who just happens to play where their best 2 players are at. That seems like a no brainer. 

The only problem with the trade is the amount of the money Boozer is making, which you seem to agree with. But if you're going at Laker fans telling them they can't make significant moves until 2007 b/c their cap situation already sucks, why do you have such a problem with this trade? If they're capped out until 2007 anyway, who cares if they're not going to be under the cap again until 2009? With Kobe and Odom making 33 million in 2007 themselves, they are basically capped out until 2009 anyway when Odom's contract is up. 

I'm sure you don't mean this, but it seems like from what you said above, that the only way a team can improve themselves significantly is to get under the cap and sign free agents. There are countless times teams have retooled tremendously just through trades and that's what the Lakers appear they would have had to do regardless of if they got Boozer or not. Does Boozer help the Lakers tremendously? Maybe not. But maybe he does. The entire NBA world was on this guy's jock before he went to Utah and maybe even for a time after that. No one should be thinking he's not a difference maker anymore especially when everyone thought he was before this year. He's definately a player. He's overpaid, but he's not Brian Grant. Does this improve the Lakers significantly? I'd say it does. 

One more thing on what you said. 



> Also...how good is Boozer really? Yeah he looked great in Cleveland with Lebron, then when he went to Utah he went right back to being the guy that everyone thought he would be when he got drafted where he was drafted.


Don't you think having a guy like Kobe around will help Booz become more the player he was in Cleveland than in Utah then?


----------



## The Gipper (Dec 27, 2004)

ChiBulls2315 said:


> I disagree. If they keep what they have now, they only way they can be under the cap anytime soon is by dealing Grant for a guy with a year less on his contract AND really just giving up Odom for an expiring contract, which would just be a terrible idea. You seem to realize that.
> 
> Even if they just dumped Grant for someone with a year less on his deal to "try" to get under the cap in 2006, it's basically impossible to do so b/c they have 30 million tied up in Kobe and Odom alone that year. There's no way they're going to have no one else under contract that year. That is, unless you just want to deal off the rest of the pieces they have for nothing and just let Caron Butler walk.
> 
> ...


One simple answer. I've yet to come across very few Laker fans in person, whose attitude isn't "well LA always gets whatever free agents they want, everyone wants to play in LA, so we'll just sign our way back to the top." Yeah if LA was under the cap and then got Yao or Lebron, that would be one thing....this doesn't make them contenders though, and runs contrary to how most egomaniacal Laker fans envision the Lakers improving the team (because, everyone wants to play in LA)

And...lol...you aren't saying Kobe makes his teammates better are you? I think you may just think Kobe is a lot better of a basketball player than I do.


----------



## The Gipper (Dec 27, 2004)

ChiBulls as someone who hates the Lakers, the better of a team and the more capped out they can be without actually being a big time, top 4, title contender...the better. That's the way I see it. This move would bring them closer to the "trap"....you know, the one where you're just bad enough not to contend, but just good enough not to get in the lottery or get a high pick. LA has always saved themselves from this by using their free agent advantage. Well if LA is capped out, that advantage is nullified.


----------



## KwaZulu (Jul 7, 2003)

This trade will make Utah a lot better. Now they put Butler at SF and Kirilenko at PF. That's an ugly matchup problem for many teams.


----------



## ChiBulls2315 (Aug 11, 2002)

I know what you mean about the Laker fans. 

I wasn't suggesting that Kobe will make Boozer better than what Lebron did or could have. I'm just saying with Kobe around, it's going to make Boozer's game easier than say, in Utah. 

And I'm also not saying this makes them a top 4 team, title contender right now. But I think it puts them in a much better position to get there vs what they got going for them now. 

But anyway, seeing as though nobody has confirmed this (looking around the internet, it looks as though it may have even been denied) this trade is looking doubtful.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

ChiBulls2315 said:


> I know what you mean about the Laker fans.
> 
> I wasn't suggesting that Kobe will make Boozer better than what Lebron did or could have. I'm just saying with Kobe around, it's going to make Boozer's game easier than say, in Utah.
> 
> ...


Read 2 or 3 down:
http://jazzfanz.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=7885&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=40


----------



## SoCalfan21 (Jul 19, 2004)

sp00k said:


> WOW.
> 
> Does this make the Lakers legit contenders?


i think that it does make the lakers contenders in a sence that the only thing that was wrong with them this year was they didnt have a true PF and they found that true power forward in carlos boozer..rebounding wasnt as good as they wanted it to be and now with boozer odom could play his true SF position


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

http://www.basketballboards.net/forum/showthread.php?t=142890


----------



## SoCalfan21 (Jul 19, 2004)

GB said:


> http://www.basketballboards.net/forum/showthread.php?t=142890


ok...they denied reports about carlos arroyo being traded and now look where hes at..


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

When you listen to guys like LBMantricks or should I say, The Gimper, your brain usually turns to mush. He's an avid Laker hating dork with a mancrush on Eddy Curry. Why would you listen to a thing he has to say about basketball? He proves time and time again he doesn't know what he's talking about.


----------



## jokeaward (May 22, 2003)

ChiBulls2315 said:


> Vlade and George's contracts don't even expire unless they opt out this summer. And Vlade is old so that might be up in air as far as him getting the same money on the market and George hasn't even played all year to opt out and hope for a nice contract.
> 
> And even if they do, with Butler there, the Jazz are only going to have like 7 million to go after free agents with, probably less with draft picks.
> 
> Was this really worth it? They couldn't have waited and hoped for something better? I mean Boozer's value is at a serious low point right now with the owner calling him out and all.


I agree.

Boozer but not for Odom? Weird.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

What's interesting to me about this is the differing philosophies between the Lakers and the Jazz.

The Jazz decided they'd made a mistake and they were going to get the salary off the books ASAP.

The Lakers looked and saw a guy who was looking overpaid and less good than most everyone thought, and decided to take on his deal.

They're over the cap regardless, so I don't see the point of arguing about that aspect of things, but how much does Boozer help them? Good numbers, yes, and consistently above average, but how far is that gonna get them?

--------------------

Also, anyone notice how similar the Lakers look to the team Jerry Krause kind of _intended_ to put together?

C- Chris Mihm -> Brad Miller
PF- Carlos Boozer -> Elton Brand
SF- Lamar Odom -> Tim Thomas
SG- Kobe Bryant -> Tracy McGrady
PG- Chucky Atkins -> Bryce Drew (OK, that one doesn't work too well)

PG of the future in a skinny SG's Body- Sasha Vujacic -> Jamal Crawford


----------



## bullsville (Jan 23, 2005)

Chucky Atkins -> Khalid El-Amin?
Chucky Atkins -> AJ Guyton?


----------



## The Gipper (Dec 27, 2004)

Mikedc said:


> What's interesting to me about this is the differing philosophies between the Lakers and the Jazz.
> 
> The Jazz decided they'd made a mistake and they were going to get the salary off the books ASAP.
> 
> ...



Mike you nailed this one.

Chris Mihm v. Shaquille O'neal
Carlos Boozer v. Karl Malone
Lamar Odom v. Devean George
Kobe Bryant v. Kobe Bryant
Chucky Atkins v. Gary Payton

Does it possibly make them a 4 seed if it goes down. Sure. Does it make them anything close to challengers to either Phoenix or San Antonio? NO. There isn't a player in LA's frontcourt that Amare Stoudemire wouldn't laugh at. 

Jerry Krause was doomed by the fact that he'd rather suck than be anything other than champion. Fact is Jerry, there's only one champion, so you have a big chance of sucking if you take that approach. But the alternative. Being good, just never good enough, is equally scary because you have to get worse to get better if that makes sense.

Kobe will never win another championship.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

bullsville said:


> Chucky Atkins -> Khalid El-Amin?
> Chucky Atkins -> AJ Guyton?


Perhaps the only time in history the phrase "Those guys couldn't hold Chucky Atkins' jock" will come to mind.


----------



## lorgg (Dec 8, 2003)

I don't think they got what they thought they were getting for the price they paid for it.


----------



## ChiBulls2315 (Aug 11, 2002)

The Gipper said:


> Does it possibly make them a 4 seed if it goes down. Sure. Does it make them anything close to challengers to either Phoenix or San Antonio? NO. There isn't a player in LA's frontcourt that Amare Stoudemire wouldn't laugh at.



Gipp, what I'm saying is no, this trade doesn't put them up with San Antonio or Phoenix. BUT, it gets them closer than where they were yesterday. You can't expect them to hit a homerun overnight and leap over everyone. If they can get another steal of a trade like this one along the lines, get a surprise pickup in the draft, or get a great deal on someone with the MLE, then they might be there. They can trade Grant's contract when it's expiring now and get something nice also. Who knows. This trade makes them significantly better than with Butler and company.


----------



## The Gipper (Dec 27, 2004)

ChiBulls2315 said:


> Gipp, what I'm saying is no, this trade doesn't put them up with San Antonio or Phoenix. BUT, it gets them closer than where they were yesterday. You can't expect them to hit a homerun overnight and leap over everyone. If they can get another steal of a trade like this one along the lines, get a surprise pickup in the draft, or get a great deal on someone with the MLE, then they might be there. They can trade Grant's contract when it's expiring now and get something nice also. Who knows. This trade makes them significantly better than with Butler and company.


But they no longer have the pieces. I hear you on Grant's contract, IN TWO YEARS, but as far as another steal of a trade.....now LA's become 3 max type players, 1 max player nobody wants (Grant) and a bunch of guys who aren't bringing anything in return. To pull off another trade they'd have to ship Odom.

Now that's fine.....but where are their needs if they ship Odom? Center, PG and SF. Yeah they could get a nice SF, but not super nice. No one is trading a center who is worth anything for a dime a dozen SF (And I don't mean that as a slight to Odom...it's a dime a dozen position). SF may have more quality players than any other in the league. So if you give Odom you're looking to get a PG or C in return....and nobody is going to part with much of anything. 

ChiBulls I like you...but you're being a Laker-wisher lol. Don't wishful think the Lakers into a more sun-filled day....it doesn't suit the Chicago board lol. Kinda like Pizza and pineapples lol.


----------



## ND Da Bulls (Feb 22, 2005)

Have you guys noticed how so far out of all the sites, only Fox Sports. net is reporting it. Perhaps that might be a problem.


----------



## ChiBulls2315 (Aug 11, 2002)

The Gipper said:


> But they no longer have the pieces. I hear you on Grant's contract, IN TWO YEARS, but as far as another steal of a trade.....now LA's become 3 max type players, 1 max player nobody wants (Grant) and a bunch of guys who aren't bringing anything in return. To pull off another trade they'd have to ship Odom



If they wouldn't have the pieces with the Boozer trade, how are they better off with the pieces they have with Butler, Vlade, and George? Vlade and George's value is just not good. They'd have to ship Odom off anyway to get something good in a trade. 

I would say right now LA has 2 max type players, 1 max player nobody wants and a bunch of guys who aren't bringing anything in return except for Butler, who happens to play the same position as their two good max players and a financial situation that's not going to get them under the salary cap anyway. I mean what you described is better than this. 

I guess I just don't see why you are so much against this trade when you've already said the Lakers were in a very bad position as it is. What are they supposed to do with Butler? Extend him for 40 million to play behind Kobe and Odom for 6 years? Or hope to trade him for a role playing PG, PF, or C? If they Jazz would do this, that's an absolute steal. There's no way Butler can bring that kind of player back in return otherwise b/c this is such a unique situation with Boozer in Utah. Should they just let George and Vlade walk for nothing when they wouldn't be under the cap for a very long time anyway? I would never have thought that combo of players lands Boozer. This trade improves them significantly.


----------



## The Gipper (Dec 27, 2004)

ChiBulls2315 said:


> If they wouldn't have the pieces with the Boozer trade, how are they better off with the pieces they have with Butler, Vlade, and George? Vlade and George's value is just not good. They'd have to ship Odom off anyway to get something good in a trade.


Sorry, should have specified context. By pieces I mean, that after this trade, they don't have like 3 five mill guys as pieces for another trade where they condense 3 players into one better player.....



> I would say right now LA has 2 max type players, 1 max player nobody wants and a bunch of guys who aren't bringing anything in return except for Butler, who happens to play the same position as their two good max players and a financial situation that's not going to get them under the salary cap anyway. I mean what you described is better than this.


Yes not doubting that. But there is this point....if you fall below it it gets harder and harder to move past it. You have to shoot to be great without being too good that you're not great, but not bad either. Get it? 



> I guess I just don't see why you are so much against this trade when you've already said the Lakers were in a very bad position as it is. What are they supposed to do with Butler? Extend him for 40 million to play behind Kobe and Odom for 6 years? Or hope to trade him for a role playing PG, PF, or C? If they Jazz would do this, that's an absolute steal. There's no way Butler can bring that kind of player back in return otherwise b/c this is such a unique situation with Boozer in Utah. Should they just let George and Vlade walk for nothing when they wouldn't be under the cap for a very long time anyway? I would never have thought that combo of players lands Boozer. This trade improves them significantly.


I'm not against this trade. I'm FOR it lol. As someone who hates the Lakers I want this trade. I'm saying...they aren't good now, they'll be better with this trade, BUT not THAT much better, and this trade while making them better but not MUCH better will decrease their financial flexibility by a ton, which I love.


----------



## The Gipper (Dec 27, 2004)

ND Da Bulls said:


> Have you guys noticed how so far out of all the sites, only Fox Sports. net is reporting it. Perhaps that might be a problem.


Yeah I'm not getting too happy yet


----------



## SoCalfan21 (Jul 19, 2004)

bullsville said:


> Chucky Atkins -> Khalid El-Amin?
> Chucky Atkins -> AJ Guyton?


el amin :laugh: :laugh: that guy was awsome....for a day


----------



## ChiBulls2315 (Aug 11, 2002)

The Gipper said:


> Sorry, should have specified context. By pieces I mean, that after this trade, they don't have like 3 five mill guys as pieces for another trade where they condense 3 players into one better player.....


I knew what you meant. But they don't have 3 guys that make that much that can get them a better player anyway. (Well so I thought, before this rumor came about) They can wait all the want and hope 3 similar players like that can get a guy of Boozer's caliber, but it's not going to happen again. Atkins and Mihm still add up to 7.3 million (this year's #s) to use in a trade (not that they'd trade them 2 for another 1 player this season) and future MLE players. 

Here are the 5 million dollar type guys on the Lakers. Divac, George, and Atkins. Mihm makes 3.7 and Butler makes 2 million with Slava somewhere in between there. 

How can you expect them to take 3 of those guys and find a better player than Boozer? And they aren't even giving up Mihm here. 



> Yes not doubting that. But there is this point....if you fall below it it gets harder and harder to move past it. You have to shoot to be great without being too good that you're not great, but not bad either. Get it?


Got it. I understand what you're saying. I just don't agree with it. You seem to think they'll be stuck with that group and can't get much better. I would say the Lakers before this trade are even worse in that hole. 



> I'm not against this trade. I'm FOR it lol. As someone who hates the Lakers I want this trade. I'm saying...they aren't good now, they'll be better with this trade, BUT not THAT much better, and this trade while making them better but not MUCH better will decrease their financial flexibility by a ton, which I love.


They'll probably end up using their MLE this summer and in 2006 with Boozer or without him. Buss isn't not going to try and help this team out, especially considering what he's done to it. Then after those two seasons, Grant's contract comes off the books for 16 million dollars. I think it's safe to assume they'll be using their MLE for the coming years after that as well. 

Since they'd be capped out with the trade or not, they only way it would affect their flexibility would be if they'd use their MLE or not every year, and I'm willing to bet they would use it b/c of the above mentioned reasons.


----------



## PC Load Letter (Jun 29, 2002)

This thread is too long for me to read through everything, so I apologize if I repeat what has already been said...

If this deal really happens, it's horrible for the Jazz. Vlade's done, Caron's good, nothing more and Devean George is one of the most overrated players in the league. Not to mention, they both play the wing, which the Jazz don't even need. The more I think about it, the less sense this makes for the Jazz and the less I believe it to be true. Until I see it reported somewhere else, I'm officially not believing it.


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune...eb22,1,5158913.story?coll=cs-basketball-print

http://www.hoopsworld.com/article_11680.shtml



> But the Los Angeles Times reported Monday that the Lakers said Odom had not been discussed in any trade talks. And Sunday, the Jazz denied they had been talking to the Lakers about trading Boozer.
> 
> "Absolutely ludicrous," Jazz senior vice president Kevin O'Connor was quoted as saying in the Deseret Morning News about the Boozer trade talk.
> 
> And Jazz owner Larry Miller told a Utah TV station, "We haven't been shopping Carlos around at all. In fact, . . . I have a hard time imagining circumstances that would have us trading Carlos."


Okay then. These are not usually comments that precede a trade.


----------



## The Gipper (Dec 27, 2004)

As someone who dislikes the Lakers I'm good either way...trade or no trade. Either way, I get to watch Kobe hang himself in his whack imitation of a Gatorade commercial lol.


----------



## spongyfungy (Oct 22, 2003)

> Without further ado, yesterday's late report that the Lakers and Jazz had consummated a deal involving Caron Butler, Vlade Divac and Devean George for Carlos Boozer was so sloppily inaccurate Daily Nuisance NBA columnist Mitch Lawrence demanded to co-sign my byline.


Ok when Vescey calls a report inaccurate....well...

http://www.nypost.com/sports/40275.htm


----------

