Yahoo Sports is Saying Stephen Jackson is Gone...

I doubt the Bulls have the best record or the number one seed without Boozer. They are still a playoff team without him but even if he was inconsistent having a scoring threat in the paint is huge. Just the threat of it will open things up for the guards. Did they overpay for him? Maybe, but it is not like he did not help the team.

That is all beside the point though. I think the plan is to build a solid core of young guys then add a big free agent to push them over the top. If Bimbo and Kemba work out and they get another lottery pick that turns out to be good next year along with a big signing like Dwight Howard then they will be ready to contend for several years.

 

err, you mean like when i said:

it's your opinion that adding 17.5 points and 9.5 rebounds per game at the 4 isn't going to help a team that lacks offense? boozer's big problem is defense, and yet the bulls were a great defensive team, so he didn't hurt them that badly, it would seem.

 

sure, if charlotte were land dwight howard, they'd be really good. of course, that is true for probably every team out there.

 

The idea though is to have some talent in place before you land Howard. Once you get Howard you are going to be a decent team just based on him. You will not get any more lottery picks with him on your roster. You need to build up your talent enough so he has a supporting cast prior to signing him.

I guess you could try to land his supporting cast in free agency like the Celtics and Heat tried to do but that is hard to pull off anywhere and probably impossible for a small market team.

The Bobcats have some talent at point guard. Henderson may turn out to be solid at shooting guard but there is nothing behind him. Magette is a band aid at best at the 3 but Cunningham has potential. They really have too much at the 4. If Diaw were gone and Thomas could start it would probably help the team. Bimbo is also going to be a 4. He is too short for the 5 no matter what his wingspan is. The 5 is our big hole. Even if Brown comes back we really need help. Maybe that is the plan, to build a roster that is a center away from being a contender then landing Howard.

 

No, because that was still you making excuses instead of admitting that you said something clearly stupid. Look again at your "correction." You quibbled with the notion that the Bulls had gone over the top instead of the idiotic statement you made about Boozer being more important to Chicago's improvement than Derrick Rose.

At no point did I say that Boozer didn't help Chicago at all, I just said that he isn't a good player and was absolutely not worth the money they spent.


Thelt:
Dwight Howard is not signing with Charlotte. Chris Paul is not signing with Charlotte. No elite free agent will ever sign with Charlotte because NBA talent gravitates to high profile cities. San Antonio sustaining a period of success is actually one of the most remarkable parts of the last 25 years in the NBA.

 

come again? when did i post that boozer was more important to chicago's improvement than derrick rose?

i retracted the "put them over the top" statement simply because the team is still flawed and will have a hard time winning championship. they still have holes and lack offsense. without carlos boozer, that would only be worse. since my retraction, i've stated pretty clearly that i believe carlos boozer was a significant factor in them going from a 500 team last year to the best record in the league this year. they went from a 41 win team to a 62 win team. it's a pretty remarkable increase in the number of games won and it would be insane to discount the addition of a player who is 2nd in scoring.

boozer missed 23 games. in those 23 games, the bulls went 15-8 (53 win pace). with boozer in the lineup, they went 47-12 (65 win pace).

fwiw, noah missed 34 games. in those 34 games, the bulls went 26-8 (62.7 win pace). with noah in the lineup, they went 36-12 (61.5 win pace). i realize you're not saying noah is the reason they had a great season, but it's worth comparing each player's absence. they got along fine without noah, they didn't without boozer.

so what, he helped them a little? with boozer, the bulls had the best record in the league. without him, they come in where? 60 wins? 55? do they come in with the #3 seed and end up playing boston in the 2nd round (assuming they make it past new york). you think they get to the ecf?

the whole point of mentioning boozer was that the bulls have gone thru a boatload of lotteries collecting all sorts of high picks and doing nothing but collecting more picks. the only thing different last year was they grabbed a top tier free agent and their pick of a rookie a coach actually turned out well this time (tim floyd, bill cartwright, vinny del negro... they didn't turn out so well).

rose is great, but without thib and boozer, i doubt they do much better than the previous years... maybe they get to 50 wins. maybe.

so the moral of the story is just cycling in new top lotto picks doesn't get you very far without landing top tier free agents. and you don't get top tier free agents if you keep blowing up your team.

 

Here:

Notice no mention of Rose's improvement being a factor. Now just act like a man for once and acknowledge that it was stupid of you to suggest that Boozer's arrival was a bigger factor in the Bulls' better record than Rose's improvement. Up until now you've just made excuses about how you shouldn't have said "over the top" because they didn't win anything yet.

Good lord. It's just embarrassing that you consider yourself a respectable intellect and yet you cannot admit to being wrong about anything. Trying to justify your statement about Boozer being more important than Rose makes you look more idiotic. This all could have been avoided if you were just capable of admitting that you screwed up by not mentioning that Rose's improvement was obviously the biggest reason for the Bulls' improvement. He won the MVP, for fuck's sake, and you're pretending like Boozer was a bigger factor. It's retarded.

Again you're pretending like Rose's improvement as a player did not happen. Holy shit, you look like a complete fucking moron with this line of bullshit. Just stop embarrassing yourself. Please, I'm begging you. Boozer and Thibodeau were not the only difference between Chicago '08-'09 and Chicago '09-'10. Good grief.

You do realize that for the rest of time whenever there is an argument on GLB and someone wants to point out what an idiot you're capable of being, they're going to link to this thread where you keep pretending that Derrick Rose did not improve at all from last season to this one. Good lord. Honestly, just start posting under a different name because this one is destroyed.

 

man, it's been a while. have all your arguments really been this transparent? i can't remember. at no point did i say or suggest boozer's contribution to the team was more important than rose's improvement. in fact, i've stated plenty of times that rose's improvement was a major factor.

but the reason i only mentioned boozer and thibodeau was because they were the additions to the bulls roster. rose was already on the team. this is a thread about building a team and somebody mentioned chicago as being the pattern they cats might try to emulate. they had something like 10 years of high lotto picks and finally landed a big time free agent and got a good coach. without either of them, the bulls would still be a mediocre team even with rose. and you don't get MVP honors if your team is not elite.

i think it's awesome that you pretty much admit you can't argue your position without absolutely contorting mine into something i clearly did not suggest.

lol. like i said, i've mentioned rose's improvement. i think it's precious that your whole argument hinges on something that didn't happen.

again, this is a thread about building a team. my post was about the actions chicago took this year to improve their team. do you think they decided last summer to tell rose he should be mvp this season?

keep telling yourself that.

i'm curious, tho. do you have any ability to actually discuss carlos boozer's contribution to the bulls? you've posted a lot of words, but none of them actually indicate that you have any understanding of basketball. for somebody with such a strong opinion on the matter, i would expect a bit more than just talking points.

 

If you're not arguing that the Bulls improvement was due largely to signing Boozer and the new coach, then I'm not sure what your argument is.

 

from what post do you get that i'm saying the bulls' "improvement was largely due to boozer and thibodeau"?

i've stated multiple times that rose's improvement, thibodeau's coaching, and the acquisition of carlos boozer are three main factors behind them going from middle of the pack to best in the league for the regular season.