1. Wouldn't have the money for Boozer...like ANY
2. Wouldn't have a starting spot for him as West is better, and he wasn't a fan of split minutes with Taj
3. Have much bigger needs
Ugh. Personally, Boozer is one of my least favorite players in the NBA...
I cannot stand Boozer and if he put on a Pacer jersey I would not watch the team. I would rather see Stephen Jackson come back.
I'd become a boozer if we signed Boozer. Oh wait... well I wouldn't like it.
Boozer? Why exactly why we would want a bad version of David West again?
the Boozer thing smells like a massive dookie but you guys are acting like him replacing Scola wouldn't be an upgrade
Boozer will end up in San Antonio somehow. That's just science.
"And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "
Want your own "Just Say No to Kamen" from @mkroeger pic? http://twitpic.com/a3hmca
Re Boozer, the guy would be a minimum signing if at all. I wouldn't stress about it.
Re the whole "dude" thing. I would think JT requesting not to be addressed by a certain term should be enough, but I guess some people want to exercise their inalienable right to call others "dude". You go, dudes.
Anyway, about the whole "nobody's chasing Lance!" stuff. I frankly don't really care, the majority of people that have run NBA teams have been failures, literally. I'm certainly surprised by it, and it does give me a small bit of pause, but not much honestly.
I've talked about this before and been laughed at, which I definitely get, but there are numerous, I don't how else to word it, "internet personalities," bloggers, tweeters, that kinda stuff that I'd trust to run a franchise over probably half the league's current guys. Most of these DUDEs didn't get their gig because they proved their worth, they got it because they knew people, same as any other industry.
I do agree, but perception's not always the reality y'nkow. Besides that, outside of the Pacers (and I guess Orlando with O'Quinn) it's not like any execs have a rapportwith this Alberto Ebanks character, far as I know anyway, maybe he's got some non-rosterable type guys under his tent and has had interactions with teams that way, but seems like those would be pretty cursory.
Regardless, Lance's free agency vs. Monroe's or Bledsoe's or whatever other RFA just isn't fair. Lance is basically in the wind right now, all the RFA guys are on a clearly strict schedule. If I'm running a team I'm clearly chasing a guy that I'm on the clock for over the guy I can call on the 15th if I feel like they're the same tier of talent.
Lance at 5/44 is a good contract for production in today's NBA, there's no two ways around it. So if that's where we get him at, I'll consider that a win. We will have a ton of flexibility moving forward with him on that sort of deal.
Yeah I mean the Pacers would head into 2016 with only Lance, Paul, and Solomon on the books right now I think, maybe CJ Miles? Either way, you're talking about a boat load of cap space and one of the best players in the NBA on the team in Paul, that tends to be a good thing for teams nowadays it seems. You can get another big impact free agent and re-sign Roy in all likelihood if he is still around and proves to be worth keeping.
Durant is the headliner of that '16 class, but there are plays for the Pacers like say Conley and one of the power forwards available in that group that could replace West like Horford.
I'm obviously getting really close to grimpin' but let's say Pacers get Lance at 5/44 today and then grab Conley and HOrford in 16 and re-up Roy and G. Hill on reasonable deals
6th Man: G. Hill
That'd be a pretty sweet team I think. Obviously I've gone full grimp-mode, but it's 2:30AM
Last edited by Trader Joe; 07-13-2014 at 02:28 AM.
I actually like Boozer. He was way overpaid, but I still like his game.
With the #3 pick in the 2015 draft, your Indiana Pacers!