Trade idea: Baby, Jermaine, and Perkins for Boozer

[MBunge]

This is the rare trade where one team gives up the most talented player, but it's the other team that gets the worst end of the deal.  Boozer is an undersized 4, which means KG would have to move to the 5 where he gives up a lot of weight to just about every other center in the league.  Even though Boozer's a very good rebounder, Boston's front court would become a lot less physical.  Boozer's contract also lasts 4 years beyond this one and I don't think he's good enough to commit that much money to when the team tries to rebuild after the New Big 3.

Mike

[pearljammer10]

I wouldnt even have to think about saying yes to that deal....

Chicago on the other hand, they would have to be smokin some awfully dank stuff to stay on the phone for more than 3 seconds after hearing that proposal.

Good point but, they did sign a guy that tripped and broke his hand and hasn't played a single minute so far this season so you never know..

Touchee...But at that time I think it was Boozer smokin the stuff not the bulls front office.

[Smitty77]

I wouldn't give up Von Wafer for Boozer and his contract.  There is NOT a softer big man in the league.  He is a stat stuffer if there EVER was one!!  He cannot defend at all!!!!  People think because he averages decent rebounds that he is a good defender, but that is total bunk.

He is a cancer in more ways than one!!!  I wouldn't give up Davis for him straight up IF we had the cap room to absorb his ridiculous salary.

Sorry for being so passionate, but have you ever watched Boozer on defense??  We don't need more scoring.

Smitty77

[barefacedmonk]

I wouldn't give up Von Wafer for Boozer and his contract.  There is NOT a softer big man in the league.  He is a stat stuffer if there EVER was one!!  He cannot defend at all!!!! 

Meet Chris Bosh..

[D Dub]

This is the rare trade where one team gives up the most talented player, but it's the other team that gets the worst end of the deal.  Boozer is an undersized 4, which means KG would have to move to the 5 where he gives up a lot of weight to just about every other center in the league.  Even though Boozer's a very good rebounder, Boston's front court would become a lot less physical.  Boozer's contract also lasts 4 years beyond this one and I don't think he's good enough to commit that much money to when the team tries to rebuild after the New Big 3.

Mike

When you factor in games played and defense - Perk is the best player in this trade.

Boozer is the big-man version of Mike Miller

[the_Bird]

On of the worst ideas I've ever read about on this blog...sorry but it is...

I wouldn't do the deal because Boozer's contract is too long and KG can't play center, but this is far, far, FAR from the worst deal I've seen proposed here.  Not even close.  If Kg was a 5, you'd do this deal, Boozer's flaws and all - he's the best player in the trade.  Perk's got maybe a 50% - 60% chance to be really effective this season, coming off the injury, and I figure he's 50/50 to come back next season.  JO's always hurt, and BBD could well walk next year too.  So, there's some logic that these guys could be gone for nothing next summer.

The deal doesn't work for Boston because of how the team's structured, the team's win-now approach, and the fact that it would leave us with a huge hole at the 5.  It doesn't really make a TON of sense for Chicago unless they've already got a lot of buyer's remorse, but it's really insulting to the OP to call this trade "one of the worst I've ever read."

[Smitty77]

OMG.  I can't believe that I missed the astonishing fact that you included Perk in this trade.  This might be the worst trade proposal I have ever heard.

[Big_Dave31]

The only person I would trade all our bigs for is Dwight Howard, in which Orlando tell us thanks, but, hell no....

[More Banners]

Boozer wouldn't be the guy I'd jump on at this moment, but let's look again at what is proposed to be given up:

A MLE big guy that has been on the tail end of his career for half a decade due to injuries and is more fragile than that first guy in Punchout,

Perk, in the last year of his deal and out injured until at least January (perhaps ASB), and whose value will be unknown until he comes back (conditioning, timing, minutes available, quickness, etc.), and

A PF who projects as a career backup.

How much is that to give up for a borderline all-star talent?  I'd throw in a first rounder for a shot at Iguodala+Battie with this offer, and would gladly take Okafor for this package in a second.

Why would we think any of these three have serious trade value to another team?

Actually...I really like that:  Perk, BBD, and JO for Iggy and Battie, possibly involving giving up a late 1st round pick in this year's weak draft?  4-big rotation of KG, Shaq, Battie and Erden, and sign Dwayne Jones for depth?

[TradeProposalDude]

In terms of sheer value, I think this trade helps both teams. As I said, Chicago is doing okay without Boozer. They have a big named Taj Gibson who is filling in for Boozer nicely. He is young and projects to perhaps be an all star sometime... soon.

As for Boston, Boozer is the best player in this trade.

I will, admittedly, back track and say for practical reasons (and realistic reasons) this trade would never happen.

1. The Celtics won't give up Perkins. After all he's done, though loyalty is hardly a factor in team transactions, Perk is a guy I think the C's would be least committed to parting with. After all, he is the type of player who helps us more than other teams.
2. Boozer just signed a big deal. I don't know if it's a CBA limitation, or just an unspoken no-no, but trading a guy in the 1st year of his contract, perhaps without ever sporting for said team, is just not going to happen.

[Fafnir]

This is the rare trade where one team gives up the most talented player, but it's the other team that gets the worst end of the deal.  Boozer is an undersized 4, which means KG would have to move to the 5 where he gives up a lot of weight to just about every other center in the league.  Even though Boozer's a very good rebounder, Boston's front court would become a lot less physical.  Boozer's contract also lasts 4 years beyond this one and I don't think he's good enough to commit that much money to when the team tries to rebuild after the New Big 3.

Mike

When you factor in games played and defense - Perk is the best player in this trade.

Boozer is the big-man version of Mike Miller

Perkins is not a better player than Carlos Boozer.

[greenhead85]

In terms of sheer value, I think this trade helps both teams. As I said, Chicago is doing okay without Boozer. They have a big named Taj Gibson who is filling in for Boozer nicely. He is young and projects to perhaps be an all star sometime... soon.

As for Boston, Boozer is the best player in this trade.

I will, admittedly, back track and say for practical reasons (and realistic reasons) this trade would never happen.

1. The Celtics won't give up Perkins. After all he's done, though loyalty is hardly a factor in team transactions, Perk is a guy I think the C's would be least committed to parting with. After all, he is the type of player who helps us more than other teams.
2. Boozer just signed a big deal. I don't know if it's a CBA limitation, or just an unspoken no-no, but trading a guy in the 1st year of his contract, perhaps without ever sporting for said team, is just not going to happen.

I agree that Boozer can help our team. It's just that we give up so many big guys. Though I believe you brought up this trade idea of giving up our 3 bigs because the money (salary) aspect matches - Boozer takes an annual pay of somewhere in 14M.

Boozer can slide from 4 to 5 to 3. Using him as 3 by maximizing his talent and skill as a post up and mid-range shooter will be devastating to the defensive side especially if the one guarding him will be Lebron, Odom or Artest or Vince. Yet, he remains to be a good defensive player. But using him at 3 will only be on situations where PP or Quisy can't handle a very strong and athletic opposition - think of Lebron and Odom. At 4 or 5, I guess we all know that either has been his perennial role while playing for the Jazz.

[Birdbrain]

I wouldn't give up Von Wafer for Boozer and his contract.  There is NOT a softer big man in the league.  He is a stat stuffer if there EVER was one!!  He cannot defend at all!!!!  People think because he averages decent rebounds that he is a good defender, but that is total bunk.

He is a cancer in more ways than one!!!  I wouldn't give up Davis for him straight up IF we had the cap room to absorb his ridiculous salary.

Sorry for being so passionate, but have you ever watched Boozer on defense??  We don't need more scoring.

Smitty77

I do believe you are on to something with regards to people believing rebounds=defense.  He's as undersized as BBD without the girth to defend bigs.  As well as an injury waiting too happen.

Boozer playing the 5 is nightmare scenario for Boston.

[screwedupmaniac]

I'm pretty sure that big men up and down the east coast would be thrilled if we traded away our team oriented, defensive minded mainstay (Perk) for this self absorbed, offensive minded scum.

Also, who's banking on Shaq being healthy all year as the team's only center? Definitely not me.

We're 8 and 2 people! Why the heck would we go and ruin a good thing with all of these trade proposals that are popping up this morning? We should trade Rondo for Bassy while we're at it.  

[2short]

 
i just threw up in my mouth