For us that wanted boozer, he seems like the better option.

Villa isnt offering much of an inside game. He isnt rebounding much and hes not blocking any shots. You'd at least expect him to score, and he is not.

I think we should still trade for boozer and get rid of one of thoes guards.

We would be smaller, but its not like Villa is doing much a the position anyway.

Villanueva is adjusting to his new team and every game he improves, last game he had 16 pts 7 rebs and a block. Besides the fact that Villanueva is 4 years younger than Boozer and nearing the prime of his career as Bozzer is on the downside, I'd say CV31s 3 pt range and 84% FTs makes him a better pick and he's cheaper.

quote:

Lain30
Veteran
Posted November 06, 2009 10:55 AM Hide Post
Villanueva is adjusting to his new team and every game he improves, last game he had 16 pts 7 rebs and a block. Besides the fact that Villanueva is 4 years younger than Boozer and nearing the prime of his career as Bozzer is on the downside, I'd say CV31s 3 pt range and 84% FTs makes him a better pick and he's cheaper.

If Charlie had Deron Williams getting the ball to him inside, he'd have Boozer like numbers. The Pistons offense is dominated by guards, and the others get few touches.

Hopefully when Rip gets back the ball will get moved around a little more, right now it looks to me like if CV wants points he just has to put the ball on the floor and take it to the hole there really aren't any plays run for him right now, but at least he is still assertive and will try and get his own points while our guards are hogging the ball.

Boozer is a better player than Villanueva, but it's not that easy to simply ask who is better.

In order to have gotten Boozer, the Pistons would have had to give up something. With Villanueva, they didn't give up anything to get him. It would have all been well and good if it was a straight up trade for Tayshaun, but some reports were talking about Rip Hamilton and possibly more, like a pick or something. I'm still not convinced I'd want them to make that deal.

Then you have to talk about the Pistons ability to re-sign him if they even would want to. Boozer has demonstrated already that he'll go where the money is and has no sense of loyalty or notion of where he best fits. Would you want the Pistons to give anywhere close to the max for Boozer, who in my opinion isn't the difference to being a legit contender anyway? I wouldn't.

So, you have to give up something, maybe a few things, he could walk after one year and go to sunny Miami where he wants to be anyway, and while he's here, he'd only make a marginal difference, perhaps the difference between the team being a borderline playoff team to at best maybe getting to the second round, at best. Is that worth it?

You can't simply ask if you'd rather have Boozer or Villanueva because there are factors and consequences involving how the Pistons would have and did acquire either.

Boozer is a better player, but as a fan, I don't have any regrets over the Pistons not trading for him.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Joe Jam,

very persuasive Joe Jam. But the fact remains Pistons still glaringly lack a low post threat. That should be Dumars top priority --- bring an impact power forward or center.

Boozer is a D Bag, he wouldn't help team chemisrty at all and like I said he is on the downside of his career, by the end of this year after we develop some chemistry you will be glad we got Charlie.

quote:

Originally posted by Catari:
very persuasive Joe Jam. But the fact remains Pistons still glaringly lack a low post threat. That should be Dumars top priority --- bring an impact power forward or center.

Point well taken. But while it's related, it's still a tangental point from discussing the comparison between Charlie and Boozer.

I don't disagree the Pistons should try to acquire at some point a big who has low post scoring ability. But, that doesn't change my opinion that the Pistons didn't really make the wrong decision by not trading for Boozer.

quote:

Originally posted by Joe Jam:

...In order to have gotten Boozer, the Pistons would have had to give up something. With Villanueva, they didn't give up anything to get him...

Well, that depends on how you look at it. The Billups/AI deal is widely viewed as a 1 yr rental of AI to get his expiring contract. So essentially we gave up Chauncey and later Amir Johnson to get CV and BG. Johnson was traded 6/23 and they signed CV and BG on or shortly after 7/1.

I think the issue of being able to resign him in the off-season was pretty big. I mean the guy gave up playing with LeBron James, LEBRON JAMES! ...for money. Plus he's older and prone to injury. I'd take CV now and let the team develop. Maybe make a trade in the off-season. We're rebuilding. This could take more than a year.

Charlie V can score down low, but can the guards get it to him? As long as the guards continue to take 70% of the shots, it doesn't matter if the front court has CV, Boozer, Bosh, Garnett or Duncan. It doesn't matter if the guards either hog the ball or are incapable of getting it to someone inside, in scoring position. Stuckey and Bynum both must learn what it means to be a PG. Right now, were playing with two and sometimes three or four shooting guards on the floor.

villanueva is still a bench player. boozer is better, but that doesnt necessarily mean i want him either. stoudemire would be my ideal choice

quote:

Originally posted by trade101:
Well, that depends on how you look at it. The Billups/AI deal is widely viewed as a 1 yr rental of AI to get his expiring contract. So essentially we gave up Chauncey and later Amir Johnson to get CV and BG. Johnson was traded 6/23 and they signed CV and BG on or shortly after 7/1.

Lol, good form. Touche.

Agreeing with Joe jam, Boozer is definitely the better player, by a whole tier even. But the cost to get him would've been ugly.

Villanueva has more range, and can come out to the perimeter to receive the ball. Boozer needs to get it closer to the basket. Our PG's don't seem to have the ability to pass inside. And, without Villanueva on the floor, who would stretch the defense for Boozer.

A lot of Boozer's success results from having Deron Williams and Mehmet Okur on the floor.

If Villaneuva keeps this up 28 points on 11 of 17 shooting I think Charlie has more potential than Carlos Boozer. He has alot of room to grow. And I know he can snap off any time but old boozer is on bad legs and has a bad attitude. They were Booing Boozer in Salt Lake city. When your own fans boo you, you know that there is a problem. Good Luck Boozer. You may be a beast on the boards but father time is catching up quick with him. He is looking older and older. And to know he's only playing for money is a bit absurd. I find that to be selfish. If the salary cap is lowering why wouldn't he accept a 10 or 11 million dollar contract to help his team win a championship???? No it's about how much money he can make and where. Well good luck Boozer on your championship. Bottom line I'd take Villaneuva over Boozer any day.

Boozer is only a better rebounder, but the offensive arsenal is about the same with Charlie V being able to take it out a bit further. I don't regret Charlie at all, but I think a lost post player like Kaman would fit the bill just nice

At this point I'd play them together. Their skill sets are different.

Boozer effectively plays the center position for the Jazz even though he's clearly undersized.

It hurts the Jazz and shows up the most, when they are deep in the playoffs (i.e. when they meet the Lakers) and his looks get more difficult. Similarly, it would probably catch up with us if we had him.

I think what Boozer would bring to the table would definitely help address our lack of a low post threat. Which, if it's true, I can't understand why we wouldn't do the Boozer/Tay deal.

Should Boozer be our first choice as a center? No. But given the dearth of quality 6-11+ premier low post scorers who can also defend and rebound, he's one of the top 5 or so F/C's that will be available.

I'd definitely prefer Amare as our center if we have to go undersized, but a lineup of Boozer, CV, Rip, BG, and Stuckey at money time seems more attractive than what we currently have.

If Zac Randoulph wasn't such a head case off the court and played D. He'd be a great low post threat and compliment CV's range.

Boozer will be a free agent, and won't sign with Detroit. This trade may help with post play, but weakens us at SF. And, after this season, he's be gone.

Boozer is effective in the low post partly because of Deron Williams who can and will pass the ball. Stuckey has shown an ability or willingness to pass. Coming to Detroit would reduce his scoring production, and would eat into Ben Wallace's playing time.

Amare is on a team that runs, and also has a good PG who can get it to him inside. Detroit has not shown any ability to run, possibly because the PG's carry the ball, and don't make outlet passes.