# Tell Me Again ...



## Dynasty Raider (Nov 15, 2002)

Bull Fans: What did/do you see in Boozer other than he's wide?

I don't get to see him often, but the times I have seen he's been useless ... he scowls and roars and nothing much more.'

So, I must be missing something when I watch him.


----------



## Pay Ton (Apr 18, 2003)

Who says we see anything in Boozer at all?

I'd say most Bulls fans don't like Boozer.

It's not like we signed him.

If you were in Chicago when Boozer was signed, you'd have heard the collective groan from throughout the city. It was pretty loud.


----------



## Dynasty Raider (Nov 15, 2002)

THE BULLS WIN.....!!!!!

Well.... glad to hear that ... it's not just me. He irritates me whenever I see him.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

Boozer is a good player, but he certainly is not worth what the Bulls gave him. He isn't a good fit with Rose and it is not a coincidence that he was more effective in Utah with Deron.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

We don't see sh!t in him. I hate his freaking guts. Least favorite Bull of all time, and it's not even close. He sucks, in every aspect of the game. I'll take Taj Gibson over him any day.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Dynasty Raider said:


> Bull Fans: What did/do you see in Boozer other than he's wide?
> 
> I don't get to see him often, but the times I have seen he's been useless ... he scowls and roars and nothing much more.'
> 
> So, I must be missing something when I watch him.



Anyone reasonably bright sees a good NBA player. He has his faults, but he's a key component to the team. Thinking otherwise is just knee-jerk neanderthal-ism.


----------



## taco_daddy (Jun 13, 2004)

Long live Boozer!


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

Boozer is a good player. But he has his faults... Probably overpaid, but not ridiculous like some on here suggest. He's pretty much a lock for at least 16 and 10ish. Not a whole lot of NBA players on good teams you can say that about.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

If I was running the team, he'd have been the guy I cut in the new exemption thing to get rid of albatross contracts. Dead serious too. Keep that cap space for someone worth signing.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

I really don't feel like arguing with cartoon characters, but exactly how good do you think the Bulls would be without Boozer? Would they be better than the Knicks or the Celtics? Probably not so you could tell it. For all of his flaws Boozer is going to give you scoring and rebounding, which you sort of need.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

DaBabyBullz said:


> If I was running the team, he'd have been the guy I cut in the new exemption thing to get rid of albatross contracts. Dead serious too. Keep that cap space for someone worth signing.


Derrick Rose's massive extension kicks in next season, meaning there would only have been about 10 millionish to use *this offseason*, and it would have prevented the Bulls from having the mid-level to give to Hamilton. Who else would the Bulls have pursued with that 10-11 million, or 5-6 with Hamilton? Amnesty'ing him would've been counterproductive.


----------



## Fergus (Oct 2, 2002)

It seems like the key factor in the minds of many Bulls fans, is the contract Boozer signed. He is scheduled to make almost 14 million dollars this season, which leads to a certain level of expectation. Last year, most seemed to feel that he did not live up to that expectation. I was one of many who thought that that performance, in light of the size and length of his contract might make him a candidate for the amnesty clause in the new CBA.

However, it seems that the Bulls are taking a different approach. The hope may be that a healthy, lighter Boozer can have more of an impact on the success of the team. He may never really justify that amount of money he is being paid, but he may be able to consistenly score 15 - 20 points a game and grab 8 - 10 rebounds. 

I admit a degree of frustration with some of his behavior on the court and his slowness on defense. I had hoped that coming in to camp healthy and lighter would help his defense, but have not seen as much improvement as I wanted. I will be interested to see who Boozer progresses over the next month or two. 

I would like to know more about the amnesty clause. Can the Bulls wait until the end of this season and then use the amnesty clause on Boozer? Could they wait until after next season?


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Fergus said:


> I would like to know more about the amnesty clause. Can the Bulls wait until the end of this season and then use the amnesty clause on Boozer? Could they wait until after next season?


It can be used with no deadline, provided the contract was on the books when the new CBA went into effect. So, it could be exercised years from now.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

caseyrh said:


> Boozer is a good player. But he has his faults... Probably overpaid, but not ridiculous like some on here suggest. He's pretty much a lock for at least 16 and 10ish. Not a whole lot of NBA players on good teams you can say that about.


Well he is the highest paid player on the team and would anyone consider him even the second best player on the team? I doubt it.

As for the 16 and 10ish thing, yeah a lot of good NBA teams can say they have this.

East Alone
Miami- Bosh 18 and 8 
Knicks - Amare 25 and 8 
Boston - KG 15 and 9
Atlanta - Horford 15 and 9, Smith 16 and 9
Orlando - Howard 22 and 14
Pacers - David West 18 and 8 
Sixers - Elton Brand had a 15 and 8 season

That all being said, I do agree that Boozer is a good player. Hes not terrible but I have to admit that hes just not a great fit for this team, defensively hes a liability and his lack of willingness to attack the basket with his size is a bit disappointing. 

Boozer is who he is, hes not going to get a whole lot better so all we can really hope for is good health and at the very least some decent numbers in the playoff's.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

Fergus said:


> I would like to know more about the amnesty clause. Can the Bulls wait until the end of this season and then use the amnesty clause on Boozer? Could they wait until after next season?



Again, Rose has a huge contract that kicks in next year. With Rose, Deng, and Noah making 8 figures and a full slate of medium-salary backups amnestying Boozer isn't going to create cap space. It doesn't accomplish anything.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

thebizkit69u said:


> Well he is the highest paid player on the team and would anyone consider him even the second best player on the team? I doubt it.
> 
> As for the 16 and 10ish thing, yeah a lot of good NBA teams can say they have this.
> 
> ...


and almost all those players make more then Boozer.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

caseyrh said:


> and almost all those players make more then Boozer.


Well then you should have said not many good teams have a 16 and 10ish guy who makes under 17 million a year. But since you did not I was just pointing out that a lot of good teams do indeed have guys like Boozer. 

The flip side can also be used that these guys make more money because they also play better defense and I know that David West doesn't make anywhere near as much money as Boozer.

Heck David Lee is a better player than Boozer and he doesn't make the same amount of money.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

So you complain about Boozer's defense and then claim that David Lee is better than him? Okay


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

If Derrick Rose knew how to run a pick and roll, Boozer will still be doing 20/10. Rose is a scorer, not a point guard.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

Bogg said:


> Derrick Rose's massive extension kicks in next season, meaning there would only have been about 10 millionish to use *this offseason*, and it would have prevented the Bulls from having the mid-level to give to Hamilton. Who else would the Bulls have pursued with that 10-11 million, or 5-6 with Hamilton? Amnesty'ing him would've been counterproductive.


Hey man, you know as well as I do how the Bulls' front office operates. They ship guys out for peanuts when they are going to be over the cap. So Boozer making that much money will limit our ability to *resign guys in the future*, and pick up better players now. I couldn't care less about Rip. He's sucked for years, and the last 2 years he's averaged 50 games is all. We certainly aren't going to miss his 6 points from last night any. Brewer and Korver work for me better than him. 

So lets look at our roster, and the guys that are cheap right now. Noah, Asik, Gibson. I'd take any of the 3 over Boozer. But Boozer's contract will likely prohibit signing at least one of them, or at least keeping them long-term after they're signed and the Bulls decide they are too cheap to pay the luxury tax, which is supposed to be more of a "penalty" now in the new CBA. 

I'm looking at the big picture, and the past tendencies of the Bulls. Not just this season. I don't see the Bulls as a legit contender at all this year. I don't see them competing with the Heat or Thunder either one, especially since Boozer will crumble against their length, and probably be hurt anyway. Just like last year's playoffs.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

HKF said:


> If Derrick Rose knew how to run a pick and roll, Boozer will still be doing 20/10. Rose is a scorer, not a point guard.


Reminds me of the Starbury, Franchise mold of PG. Sure they can get 6-8 assists, but its just from dominating the ball. 

Getting an assist from passing out of a double or triple team isn't the same as actively looking for the open man like a true point does.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

jnrjr79 said:


> It can be used with no deadline, provided the contract was on the books when the new CBA went into effect. So, it could be exercised years from now.


Are you serious? I just assumed that was a thing limited to right then, before the season. Are you sure they can do it in the future too, with any pre-existing contract? If so, then it's not so bad at all. They can just cut him when they need to resign someone more worthy to a bigger contract.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

DaBabyBullz said:


> Hey man, you know as well as I do how the Bulls' front office operates. They ship guys out for peanuts when they are going to be over the cap. So Boozer making that much money will limit our ability to *resign guys in the future*, and pick up better players now. I couldn't care less about Rip. He's sucked for years, and the last 2 years he's averaged 50 games is all. We certainly aren't going to miss his 6 points from last night any. Brewer and Korver work for me better than him.
> 
> So lets look at our roster, and the guys that are cheap right now. Noah, Asik, Gibson. I'd take any of the 3 over Boozer. But Boozer's contract will likely prohibit signing at least one of them, or at least keeping them long-term after they're signed and the Bulls decide they are too cheap to pay the luxury tax, which is supposed to be more of a "penalty" now in the new CBA.
> 
> I'm looking at the big picture, and the past tendencies of the Bulls. Not just this season. I don't see the Bulls as a legit contender at all this year. I don't see them competing with the Heat or Thunder either one, especially since Boozer will crumble against their length, and probably be hurt anyway. Just like last year's playoffs.


A Noah/Gibson/Asik frontcourt has no ability to generate offense in the post. Waiving Boozer to retain either Asik or Gibson makes the team worse.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

R-Star said:


> Reminds me of the Starbury, Franchise mold of PG. Sure they can get 6-8 assists, but its just from dominating the ball.
> 
> Getting an assist from passing out of a double or triple team isn't the same as actively looking for the open man like a true point does.


I would say drawing a double team and then passing to an open man is _exactly_ what a true pg should do. Probably the whole point of playing PG is to apply enough pressure to the D that you can creat an opening for someone else on your team. 

The difference between Rose and your definition of a "true pg" is that Rose is able to score much better then your version. I just figure you might as well put it in yourself if you can.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

thebizkit69u said:


> Well then you should have said not many good teams have a 16 and 10ish guy who makes under 17 million a year. But since you did not I was just pointing out that a lot of good teams do indeed have guys like Boozer.
> 
> The flip side can also be used that these guys make more money because they also play better defense and I know that David West doesn't make anywhere near as much money as Boozer.
> 
> Heck David Lee is a better player than Boozer and he doesn't make the same amount of money.


I thought I was being fairly clear, but if I wasnt I apologize...

My point was that you have to pay good money for a post player that is capable of putting up 16-18 and 9-11 , on a good team. You flashed up a list of players that do it but make significantly more then Booz. So we are on the same page.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

Bogg said:


> A Noah/Gibson/Asik frontcourt has no ability to generate offense in the post. Waiving Boozer to retain either Asik or Gibson makes the team worse.


Boozer doesn't generate much/any offense in the post if there's a big guy in there anyway. At least the other 3 can run the floor and play some defense, not to mention stay healthy and cost half as much or less. So I definitely disagree with that. 14 mill for that POS Boozer, or 7 mill for Gibson and Asik apiece? I'll take the 2 to 1 any day.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

caseyrh said:


> I thought I was being fairly clear, but if I wasnt I apologize...
> 
> My point was that you have to pay good money for a post player that is capable of putting up 16-18 and 9-11 , on a good team. You flashed up a list of players that do it but make significantly more then Booz. So we are on the same page.


Factoring all that in, then yes we are. 



> If Derrick Rose knew how to run a pick and roll, Boozer will still be doing 20/10. Rose is a scorer, not a point guard.


And if Boozer could finish at the basket Rose would have averaged 10 asst.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

DaBabyBullz said:


> Are you serious? I just assumed that was a thing limited to right then, before the season. Are you sure they can do it in the future too, with any pre-existing contract? If so, then it's not so bad at all. They can just cut him when they need to resign someone more worthy to a bigger contract.


Yep, I'm sure. They have flexibility. No hurry to use it now.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

jnrjr79 said:


> Yep, I'm sure. They have flexibility. No hurry to use it now.


Well in that case it's not so bad. Nice knowing we can dump his worthless butt any time we want/need to. I would assume there's some clause in there on injuries making it all "guaranteed" still though or don't you know?


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

DaBabyBullz said:


> Well in that case it's not so bad. Nice knowing we can dump his worthless butt any time we want/need to. I would assume there's some clause in there on injuries making it all "guaranteed" still though or don't you know?


The money's all guaranteed. If a player get amnesty'd the full value of the contract still has to be paid to him, it just doesn't count against the cap or lux tax anymore. There's a window to use it the next couple off-seasons, so it's not an option that can be invoked at any time, but yes, they can sit on it for a year or two if they like.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

thebizkit69u said:


> And if Boozer could finish at the basket Rose would have averaged 10 asst.


Boozer finished at the basket with Deron Williams as his point guard. Look, it's okay to say that Rose isn't a great point guard passer. He's a scorer, that's his best trait. Nothing wrong with admitting that. He's still an awesome player, top 5 in the league.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

DaBabyBullz said:


> Well in that case it's not so bad. Nice knowing we can dump his worthless butt any time we want/need to. I would assume there's some clause in there on injuries making it all "guaranteed" still though or don't you know?



Well, the money remains guaranteed regardless. If you use amnesty, you still have to pay what's left on the contract. The upside is it doesn't count against the cap, so you can get some space to bring in other players (or, more likely, in the case of the Bulls, avoid paying the luxury tax).


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

HKF said:


> Boozer finished at the basket with Deron Williams as his point guard. Look, it's okay to say that Rose isn't a great point guard passer. He's a scorer, that's his best trait. Nothing wrong with admitting that. He's still an awesome player, top 5 in the league.


I have no problem saying this but you are just wrong about Boozer. 

If you watched games last year, how many damn times did we see Boozer come off a roll go in with a soft lay up and get it swatted away. Derrick is not a prototypical PG and doesn't have the court vision that Paul and Williams have but its absolutely un fair to blame Boozers play on Rose. 

There is a reason why Utah could not wait to get rid of him.


----------



## sMaK (Jun 13, 2002)

He's not blaming his play on Rose. Just saying that Deron is the better passer and creator, thus inflating Boozer's stats.


----------



## PD (Sep 10, 2004)

Boozer's age may be playing a role. He has lost some quickness (and he is not known to be fast), and jumping ability.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

sMaK said:


> He's not blaming his play on Rose. Just saying that Deron is the better passer and creator, thus inflating Boozer's stats.





> If Derrick Rose *knew *how to run a pick and roll, Boozer will still be doing 20/10. Rose is a scorer, *not a point guard*.


Really? That doesn't sound like blaming Rose? 

Boozer looks to lost a ton of explosion from his days in Utah, hes getting to the basket hes just not finishing.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

This is a Boozer issue, not a Rose issue. Derrick Rose may not be John Stockton, but he is a more than adequate PG, passer and distributor. Rose is actually quite adept at running the pick and roll (which VDN ran ad-naseum with a roster of big men who couldn't finish at the rim). 

Boozer was never going to be a defender for us and has always been a guy who lacked athleticism for his position. What I'd like to see him do is the one thing I really thought we were getting that I have only seen in spurts - the guy is a bull (pun intended), who needs to aggressively back guys down in the post and get high percentage shots. His willingness to settle for fadeaway or pull up J's is a little disconcerting from my perspective. There was a moment in the 2nd preseason game where he backed Roy Hibbert down and nearly moved him into the 3rd row, resulting in an easy basket... I remember thinking "where the hell has that been!". 

We need Boozer to step it up defensively or start asserting himself in the post... I found myself clamoring for more Taj Gibson last night, and I don't consider myself one of Boozer's irrational detractors (speaking of which, Dababybullz... how's that irrational Luol Deng hatred working out for you?).


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

Dornado said:


> (speaking of which, Dababybullz... how's that irrational Luol Deng hatred working out for you?).


Well I don't get why you'd bring that up here, but it's not irrational, nor hatred either one. He's a f'in pu$$. Always has been, always will be. He's improved the last 2 years for some bizarre reason. He's still nowhere near as good as people hype him to be, but at least he has some shooting range now. I didn't see last night's game (screwed up and deleted it after I got done watching the T-Wolves' game, thinking it was the Lakers' game) but I see he had the best night statistically (which didn't have much competition).


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

Bogg said:


> The money's all guaranteed. If a player get amnesty'd the full value of the contract still has to be paid to him, it just doesn't count against the cap or lux tax anymore. There's a window to use it the next couple off-seasons, so it's not an option that can be invoked at any time, but yes, they can sit on it for a year or two if they like.


Ah that makes a lot of sense. I never looked into the issue at all. I thought it was rather odd that the players would agree to something that would make 1 player's contract void. Seeing they still get paid, but it's a cap move for teams makes a lot of sense. Thanks.


----------



## SWIFTSLICK (Aug 22, 2009)

DaBabyBullz said:


> We don't see sh!t in him. I hate his freaking guts. Least favorite Bull of all time, and it's not even close. He sucks, in every aspect of the game. I'll take Taj Gibson over him any day.


Ok. I hate Booz and his lack of, well, everything. But the least favorite Bull of all time? I think that's reserved for John Starks (the worst four games in Bulls History I can remember watching). Or Eddie Robinson. Or Jalen Rose. Or Eddy Curry. Or Marcus Fizer. Or Corey Benjamin... I better stop this before I get pissed.


----------



## PD (Sep 10, 2004)

We could do a lot worst than Boozer. The man at least can score abundance here and there. By far, he is better than Fizer, who as the 4th pick.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

I'm not saying Boozer is the worst Bull ever. He is worthless, for damn sure, but yeah we've had worse. But I definitely hate him more than the rest, and it's not even close. His loudmouth antics, always alternating between acting like he thinks he's a bada$$, and then like he's a cripple, on back to back plays, depending on if he got punked or not. Stuff like that. Disgusting.


----------



## Pay Ton (Apr 18, 2003)

Even if Rose is not a true point guard, he's better than 99% of all the "pure" point guards in the NBA in the past five years.

And he might soon be better than all of them remaining.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

Pay Ton said:


> Even if Rose is not a true point guard, he's better than 99% of all the "pure" point guards in the NBA in the past five years.
> 
> And he might soon be better than all of them remaining.


He's already better than 100% of them. Thus the MVP last year, and leading the team to the playoffs with crap for scoring around him.


----------



## mvP to the Wee (Jul 14, 2007)

I actually don't really get the Boozer hate. He was injured last year in the playoffs with the turf toe and lingering ankle sprain issues. It has nothing to do with being a pussy, if you have an injury, you have an injury, he just somehow gets hurt all the time. This season so far he had a decent game against the Lakers and granted I watched the game from a hookah bar against GS, he didn't seem awful and 7 shots for him just isnt enough. He has always opted for the jump shot against shot blockers and never created his shot down low. He's good at getting to spots where he'll work a quick move to score. The only difference I saw from the Laker game and early last season was that Boozer got to the line a lot. He's gonna need to draw fouls to become an efficient scorer again. Sorry if the post isn't well structured I'm doing this on my phone


----------



## Adam (Jan 28, 2003)

Does anybody know how the new CBA affects buyouts? You guys should know because you've got Nikola Mirotic stashed overseas. I think it's a given that Boozer is keeping the PF spot warm until Mirotic's contract finishes.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

16 points on 50% shooting and 15 boards...

Let's amnesty this bum!


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

Just wait till the sissy gets hurt again, or goes against someone with any size at all. Going against 6'6" Chuck Hayes you would expect Boozer to put up decent #s. 6'11" Cousins is the only starter out there for the Kings over 6'6". Only 2 other players off the bench had size one 6'9", one 6'11", and they played a combined 32 minutes. That's the definition of small-ball.


----------



## Firefight (Jul 2, 2010)

Boozer is one of the top scoring low-post players in the league... He also is one of the worst help defenders in the league. It is what it is...


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

jnrjr79 said:


> 16 points on 50% shooting and 15 boards...
> 
> Let's amnesty this bum!


Strange, but I didn't see you posting his stats from the Golden State game.

Why is that?


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

DaBabyBullz thought Memphis was in the Eastern Conference a few years back.

Let's trust his basketball analysis.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

R-Star said:


> Strange, but I didn't see you posting his stats from the Golden State game.
> 
> Why is that?



If you had a modicum of sense, you would realize that my post above was tongue-in-cheek, designed to show the stupidity of overreacting to a single good or bad game. My recurring point has been that judgments on retaining or shipping out players need to be made by evaluating a sufficient sample size, rather than just having a knee-jerk reaction to one or two ballgames.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

jnrjr79 said:


> If you had a modicum of sense, you would realize that my post above was tongue-in-cheek, designed to show the stupidity of overreacting to a single good or bad game. My recurring point has been that judgments on retaining or shipping out players need to be made by evaluating a sufficient sample size, rather than just having a knee-jerk reaction to one or two ballgames.


The sample size stretches into last season as well.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

R-Star said:


> The sample size stretches into last season as well.


Absolutely, ive been saying this for MONTHS! 

Its good to see Boozer have a good offensive game but if you watched the game, he played atrocious defense and did a poor job of setting decent picks.. NOT just my opinion but Stacy King was all on him last night. 

One thing that bothered me the most was that he was being guarded by 6'6 freaking CHUCK HAYES and Boozer din't take it to him. Boozer was jacking up 18 foot fade aways like he was Jamal Crawford, they went in which was nice but It was just head scratching to me why he din't just eat up the post.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

thebizkit69u said:


> Its good to see Boozer have a good offensive game but if you watched the game, he played atrocious defense and did a poor job of setting decent picks.. NOT just my opinion but Stacy King was all on him last night.
> .



You again seem not to be watching the same games anyone else is. Boozer had a couple of matador moments, but was undeniably much more engaged on the defensive end. He also set any number of solid picks. This is a weird criticism on your part.

The point, though, is to let things play out for more than 3 games before getting crazy.

Last year shouldn't count the same as this year, given the injury history.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

thebizkit69u said:


> Absolutely, ive been saying this for MONTHS!
> 
> Its good to see Boozer have a good offensive game but if you watched the game, he played atrocious defense and did a poor job of setting decent picks.. NOT just my opinion but Stacy King was all on him last night.
> 
> One thing that bothered me the most was that he was being guarded by 6'6 freaking CHUCK HAYES and Boozer din't take it to him. Boozer was jacking up 18 foot fade aways like he was Jamal Crawford, they went in which was nice but It was just head scratching to me why he din't just eat up the post.


You don't seem to know much about CHUCK HAYES. CHUCK NORRIS knows better than to come into the paint on CHUCK HAYES.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

jnrjr79 said:


> You again seem not to be watching the same games anyone else is. Boozer had a couple of matador moments, but was undeniably much more engaged on the defensive end. He also set any number of solid picks. This is a weird criticism on your part.
> 
> The point, though, is to let things play out for more than 3 games before getting crazy.
> 
> Last year shouldn't count the same as this year, given the injury history.


Ok sorry Jnrjr, I guess me and Stacy King aren't watching the same game... Please forgive us for our lack of basketball knowledge.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Diable said:


> You don't seem to know much about CHUCK HAYES. CHUCK NORRIS knows better than to come into the paint on CHUCK HAYES.


Chuck Hayes invented basketball.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

Cinco de Mayo said:


> DaBabyBullz thought Memphis was in the Eastern Conference a few years back.
> 
> Let's trust his basketball analysis.


Why don't you go try to catch a bullet with your teeth. How TROLLS like you ever become mods is mind boggling.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

civility is a good thing, let's stay on topic, everyone.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Stay on topic... Or else Chuck Hayes slices your throat in your sleep.


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

DaBabyBullz said:


> Why don't you go try to catch a bullet with your teeth. How TROLLS like you ever become mods is mind boggling.


Touchy, touchy.


----------

