Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Boozer?


Recommended Posts

"Some." I never said he couldn't do it "briefly," but there's no way he's going to be penciled in as the "backup SF." That would be ridiculous.

Some as in enough where he could make a living as a back up small forward. I personally don't think we will sign Boozer but if we do then someone is getting moved.

Hypothetically, I guess we could move Zeller to center and roll with Boozer, Williams, Vonleh. Nonetheless, you would still be paying $7 mil for a backup.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some as in enough where he could make a living as a back up small forward. I personally don't think we will sign Boozer but if we do then someone is getting moved.

Hypothetically, I guess we could move Zeller to center and roll with Boozer, Williams, Vonleh. Nonetheless, you would still be paying $7 mil for a backup.

 

Some, as in, sometimes, not most of his time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know how it works but if we only have to pay him 2 mill then that would be a great deal. I know a bunch of these low Ignorant UNC fans don't want him because he went to Duke but for that price you would be retarded to say no.

Sent from my iPhone using CarolinaHuddle

Congrats on being the one to bring college into this discussion. There are usually a few in each thread that can't think past it, but there always has to be the first one to get it started.

Well done

Sent from my iPad using CarolinaHuddle

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't like the idea of Williams starting over MKG or even coming off the bench at SF. Maybe it's because he missed all of last year and I'm thinking he's better than he is, but I'd rather see Taylor get the second string run than Williams. I'm more happy with Williams starting at the 4. I don't dislike having Boozer, but after signing Williams the idea definitely confuses me.

Sent from my iPad using CarolinaHuddle

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't like the idea of Williams starting over MKG or even coming off the bench at SF. Maybe it's because he missed all of last year and I'm thinking he's better than he is, but I'd rather see Taylor get the second string run than Williams. I'm more happy with Williams starting at the 4. I don't dislike having Boozer, but after signing Williams the idea definitely confuses me.

Sent from my iPad using CarolinaHuddle

What are you talking about? Marvin played 66 games last season, and mostly at SF. He was also better than Luol Deng last season.

Williams/Boozer would be solid at the 3/4 but it buries our two most important pieces (MKG/Vonleh) on the bench. Wasn't the point of blowing up our first playoff team to get rid of overpaid veterans and rebuild with young players?

I don't get this team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What are you talking about? Marvin played 66 games last season, and mostly at SF. He was also better than Luol Deng last season.

Williams/Boozer would be solid at the 3/4 but it buries our two most important pieces (MKG/Vonleh) on the bench. Wasn't the point of blowing up our first playoff team to get rid of overpaid veterans and rebuild with young players?

I don't get this team.

I was talking about Taylor missing last season and wanting to see him come off the bench and not wanting to see MKG coming off the bench.

Edit: meaning I'm not excited about MW at the 3

Sent from my iPad using CarolinaHuddle

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And right back where we were in '08.

 

So having a bunch of young guys learning from old guys is similar to 08? Maybe my memory is gone but I do not remember having too many young guys with potential.

 

Now we will have mentors, I know a crazy idea, to help our young young talent. 

 

MKG - 20

Noah - 18 

Zeller - 21

PJ - 21 

Biz - 21 

Kemba - 24

Taylor - 25

 

These guys being groomed by veterans?!?! Horrible idea!  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So having a bunch of young guys learning from old guys is similar to 08? Maybe my memory is gone but I do not remember having too many young guys with potential.

Now we will have mentors, I know a crazy idea, to help our young young talent.

MKG - 20

Noah - 18

Zeller - 21

PJ - 21

Biz - 21

Kemba - 24

Taylor - 25

These guys being groomed by veterans?!?! Horrible idea!

Still a 7-8 seed with no shooting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still a 7-8 seed with no shooting.

 

So without Boozer last yr we were the 7th seed but very close to the 5th so now with everybody back and older minus Roberts but plus draft picks and hypothetically Boozer, we are in a worse position and no hope for the future?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Yeah, Darnold is basically a really high level game manager. Put him on a good team where he isn't required to provide lift and he can shine. But when you need him to do the franchise QB thing and put the team in his back here comes the INTs. He just doesn't seem to have any positions on his dial between "super conservative take whatever's there and take care of the ball" and "YOLO!!! There's a receiver down there somewhere in that sea of defenders!"
    • See, it's posts like this that show me how many of you are taking my post as an anti Dowdle post and saying he didn't have a good game, but that's the furthest thing from my intention and what I'm trying to say. Because that's the comparison you're making with Bryce, it's adding or removing a small handful of plays from their stats and saying "this is the game they could have had instead" I'm literally only talking about the play calling from the game, it's literally in the title of the thread, that we still have play calling problems. I'm saying that people are going to get stuck on the 200 yard rushing game by a player and extrapolate that to "well Canales must have called a good game" and I'm trying to say not to fall for that mirage. Because 6 big runs do not make for a well called game when we had over 60 snaps. Even beyond that, if you add in the two 20+ yard catches from T-Mac and the one XL had, and you're looking at 9 of over 60 snaps that accounted for close to 60% of our yards in the game. That's a few big plays covering up for coaching deficiencies, that's NOT a well called 60 minutes of football. Had he had the 200 yards because Canales' play calling was keeping the defense on their heels, not knowing what we were doing next, and Dowdle was ripping of 8-12 yard runs on a consistent basis, then yea, that would be something to be excited about with Canales finally calling a good game for a change. Our offense is predictable and the play design is basic, there is nothing I've seen out of Canales' offense that says he's able to scheme and call plays to outsmart the defense, which is something all the elite offensive coaches are able to do in this day and age.
    • Dante Moore is the top pick in a couple of mock drafts now. 
×
×
  • Create New...