I'd agree with Chris. He might lose fewer rebounds than Boozer but they'll both go down some. Boozer's also a bigger part of the offense so Noah might not get as many shots.
The rebounds thing is debateable..but the fewer points I don't see. How are you going to take points away from a guy who scores primarily on opportunistic baskets?
Boozer is a much more efficient player inside than Gibson or Miller, so presumably there will be fewer put backs, etc., for Noah. That's one way that Noah's points will go down. There will also be more defenders in the paint in general, which could cut down on opportunities.
Defenders will leave Noah to double Boozer, that's one way that he'll get more open looks.
Noah will also take Gibson's role as primary pick and roll player, so he'll get more looks as Boozer gets his position in the paint.
And also, how are there going to more defenders in the paint? Am I missing something, or does Carlos Boozer's addition mean the Bulls opponents get to have 6 players on the court at all times?
Boozer's shot selection mirrors Taj Gibson's almost identically.
Taj Gibson: 48% jumpshots, 52% inside
Carlos Boozer: 49% jumpshots, 51% inside
If anything the added attention to Boozer will help Noah, not hurt him.
See, I think it could go either way. There really is no way to know how either player is going to respond. But isn't that another reason to wait it out? See what happens.
Who's list of salaries showed that Noah is already near the top of the pay tier for non-superstar centers on the old CBA. So, based on that, I really see little risk that the Bulls would be losing a lot of money. So why not wait, and have the possibility to actually save money...and also keep alive the possibility of a trade for a superstar like Melo.
Well if anything this also helps the odds of getting Melo, because Noah is under a long-term contract.
But I agree, I will defend Noah the player to the death, but the Bulls should've waited.
Except for 2 things:
1. Denver already went through TWO "extend and immediately regret" scenarios with Kenyon and Nene.
2. Technically, it's exceedingly difficult to trade someone if they've already agreed to an extension from their rookie deal: they become a "poison pill contract," meaning they only count as their rookie salary for outgoing purposes but the receiving team must count them as the per season average of their last rookie contract year and all the years of the extension. So it's even harder to trade the poison pill player than the BYC player. I don't see Noah turning down this proposed contract in any scenario, so maximal flexibility would have been to put off signing the extension so that he was still an extremely easy to trade piece, then, if traded, he could always sign an extension immediately after the trade.
In general, I agree with the above posters:
What did Chicago gain by jumping the gun?
Absolute worst case scenario is Noah plays the same or better, the CBA stays the same, Noah becomes a RFA, and someone offers him the max and they match. In this case, they'd pay 5 years 80 million, or 4 million more per year. Yes, that seems like a lot, but keep this in mind:
-He would presumably have played well enough to earn a Max RFA offer, so that'd be good for Chicago
-Chicago is trying to contend and is over the cap for now and the future, so it's not like they're trying to budget to add FA's
-Chicago is a huge market
-All signs point to the CBA being quite different, leading me to believe it would be highly unlikely for Noah to earn 80 million this year.
On the flipside, by waiting, they would absolutely keep the possibility of a trade alive, or they could have let the market get a lower price for Noah, and not risk the distinct possibility that Noah, a 25 year old hustle lanky center, has almost peaked or gets injured.
I just don't see the risk.