UPDATED: Perfect example of why NBA players are SCUMS.....

[CTrain]

OK, I stand corrected.
Hell, if you can't trust what ESPN wrote, who can you trust ??
ESPN keep saying that he was unrestricted.

Cleveland will still have 15 days after the contract is signed to match the offer and retain his service.
The problem is that he is a 2 yr player and Cleveland cannot go over the cap to match as if they could with a veteran.

Stupidity on Cleveland's part.
Boozer is still a scumbag for getting Cleveland to release him from the contract by saying all along that he will sign an extension.

I'm done with the topic, goodnight.

 

[NeoV]

wow are some of you basketball idiots..

if you don't know who he is, why bother even posting in this thread?

Comparing Boozer to ........Juwan Howard? My god that is insane - Howard averages 7 boards a game, not 10, is awful defensively, and isn't half the player Boozer is.

In the very first post there is an error - 2nd round picks don't get a 3 year contract - hardly ever - 1st round picks get a guaranteed 3 yr deal, 2nd round picks have no such guarantee - in fact, I can't recall another 2nd round pick who got a three year deal like this.

This is somewhat similar to the situation that led to Gilbert Arenas leaving Golden St - only the problem with him was that he did so well, and he was only signed to a one-year deal in the first place (since he was a 2nd round pick), so he was unrestricted, and the Warriors couldn't afford him.

Yes, this is a major bludner by the Cavs, but I still think they will make the necessary cap adjustments to match the offer (which they have the right to do - he is only a restricted free agent at this point). They are going to have to practically give away some players though - other teams will make them pay! They can also trade players for "exception" salary spots - for example, the Rockets have nearly 7Mill of exception money available to them this year, that they can trade - so you might see something like a DeJuan Wagner to Houston deal to get the Cavs that money for their cap. They may even have to trade Big Z now, and get little in return in terms of players.

I obviously haven't seen the details of the Jazz offer, but it is likely front-loaded to make it harder for the Cavs to match.

Keep in mind that Boozer controlled NONE of this until the Cavs LET him out of his contract for the upcoming season - that coming as a result of the Cavs, Boozer, and his agent talking about his long-term future with the team after next season. What I don't get is why there was any rush to do this now - why not just wait until next season, when he would have been an unrestricted free agent, and then you would have been able, as the Cavs, to offer him more money than any other team could, and you are allowed to exceed the cap to re-sign your own free agents? Looks like they were trying to keep his salary down in the 05/06 - 08/09 years. Still, if the guy gave his word, and there was some sort of agreement, this is shady stuff.

If the Cavs do lose Boozer, Paxson HAS to go. I still say there is more to this story - should be an interesting week around here!

 

[manly]

Cavs should have picked up the option year and tried to sign him to an extension before the start of this coming season.

There's nothing in that Plain Dealer article that implies any kind of verbal agreement was made; even if there was one, it's not smart business to roll the dice to the tune of tens of millions of dollars, based on loyalty.

 

[SP33Demon]

Boozer = bitch for giving his word, Cavs = moronic for letting him out of contract...

 

[Ranger X]

Originally posted by: MrDingleDangle

so u think unethical things are fair as long as they arent illegal?

Yeah, why not? He didn't break any rules and it was a verbal agreement ... A VERBAL AGREEMENT. The Cavs were stupid to accept that and it was their mistake for letting him loose. Plus, they have the rights to match his offer so he's not a Jazz just yet -- although you can pretty much consider him a Jazz w/the situation in Cleveland.

Anyway, how does his decision affect YOU in any way? It's a business and you would not hesitate to do the same if you were in Boozer's position. It would be wrong had Boozer known about this deal and deliberately lied to the Cavs but I am almost certain that this deal came up after the Cavs' decided to not pick up his 3rd year. Well again, wrong or not it's a business. How ignorant do you have to be to think this type of business doesn't occur everyday in any business?

Moral of the story ... STOP CARING ABOUT SOMEONE ELSE'S MONEY BECAUSE YOU WILL NOT SEE A DIME OF HIS MONEY. And learn to close a bold statement so it doesn't bleed onto those that quote you (for those using bold). :disgust:

 

[NeoV]

Manly - the Cav's wouldn't have been able to sign him to an extension - that only works with the first round pick contracts - he is in line to get much more since he was a 2nd rounder - backwards logic, but true.

They should have just let him play the upcoming season at his current contract, and then they would have been able to offer him more than anyone else as an unrestricted free agent.

I still say he ends up in Cleveland for the long haul, even if they have to give a few players away to make the cap room. Big Z, D.Wagner, D.Diop, T.Battie, Jeff M, etc, etc. Keep LeBron and Boozer together, and fill in the gaps from there! Keep Luke Jackson too, he can play.

 

[krunchykrome]

Originally posted by: CTrain
So this guy Carlos Boozer was a second round draft pick.
So being a 2nd round pick, Cleveland signed for for the usual 3 yr contract with the 3rd yr being a team option.
Boozer had a very good 2nd year average 15+ppg and 10+rpg.
Cleveland had him for the option 3rd yr for $695,000.
So for having a breakout season, Cleveland decided to reward the guy.
They are going to renounce his option 3rd yr(making him a unrestricted FA) if he agrees on a new contract 6yrs for $40 mil.
So he agrees to this so Cleveland made him an unrestricted FA.

Now he goes and sign with Utah for 6yrs/68mil

This guy is TOTAL SCUM !!

Before you plays devil's avocate and say he needs to get whatever he can.....WAIT....

a) Cleveland was giving him a raise from $695K to 5mil.
b) Cleveland was not going to make him an unrestricted FA if he didn't already told them he will sign a new contract.
c) So if he didn't think Cleveland offer is enough....Cleveland could have had him for another yr and maybe trade him or by next yr they have have more money to give him.

This is about as bad of a back stabbing can get.

It's just business.

 

[ZOXXO]

Never trust a Dookie.

 

[manly]

Originally posted by: NeoV
Manly - the Cav's wouldn't have been able to sign him to an extension - that only works with the first round pick contracts - he is in line to get much more since he was a 2nd rounder - backwards logic, but true.

They should have just let him play the upcoming season at his current contract, and then they would have been able to offer him more than anyone else as an unrestricted free agent.

That's pretty much what I said.

 

[kalster]

cleveland got served !!!

 

[gigapet]

its strictly business nothing personal

 

[TStep]

I think only a Boozer-Paxson Celebrity Death Match can solve this one.

 

[TheAudit]

Cleveland fvcked up, they trusted him. That's what happens when you only have a verbal agreement. Has happened before in sports.

 

[CtK]

i agree with u CTrain boozer is a backstabber
but the Cavs were morons for not keeping his current contract and match any offers next season for him
LeBron must be pissed at him and the cavs!!
and there both playin on the olympic team
wonder if LJ will pass to boozer

 

[OCNewbie]

Basketball is just a business, it's about making money. Carlos is in business for himself, he's his own best asset, so he made the best move for himself. I doubt there will be hurt feelings, just a lesson learned by the Cavs. There are no friendly gestures in that situation, when you're talking about 28 million dollars.

 

[dquan97]

<Jerry Maguire>You've got my word. And it's solid as oak</>

 

[Ranger X]

Boozer did backstab but I don't see a reason why he has to be bound to a verbal agreement.

Here is a scenario. Let's say you're working for a company as a contractor, making $12/hour. You've been there for 2 years and you've worked your a$$ off. Management has noticed your great performance and promises you a job that pays say .. 60k/year if you stick around another year as a contractor. You think, 60k/year is great and gladly accept by means of a verbal agreement. Then comes a company that offers you 100k/year but wants you to start right away. Would you decline the 100k offer just because you don't want to piss off the people at the current company? Do you try and be a "nice guy", have loyalty, and stick around as a contractor for 1 more year? You would take the 100k job because you, along with everyone else, is looking out for their own best interest. Boozer is just looking out for himself and his family.

 

[maziwanka]

Originally posted by: CTrain
So this guy Carlos Boozer was a second round draft pick.
So being a 2nd round pick, Cleveland signed for for the usual 3 yr contract with the 3rd yr being a team option.
Boozer had a very good 2nd year average 15+ppg and 10+rpg.
Cleveland had him for the option 3rd yr for $695,000.
So for having a breakout season, Cleveland decided to reward the guy.
They are going to renounce his option 3rd yr(making him a unrestricted FA) if he agrees on a new contract 6yrs for $40 mil.
So he agrees to this so Cleveland made him an unrestricted FA.

Now he goes and sign with Utah for 6yrs/68mil

This guy is TOTAL SCUM !!

Before you plays devil's avocate and say he needs to get whatever he can.....WAIT....

a) Cleveland was giving him a raise from $695K to 5mil.
b) Cleveland was not going to make him an unrestricted FA if he didn't already told them he will sign a new contract.
c) So if he didn't think Cleveland offer is enough....Cleveland could have had him for another yr and maybe trade him or by next yr they have have more money to give him.

This is about as bad of a back stabbing can get.

if i was a cleveland fan, i would certainly be pissed off. in fact, if i ever went to the cav games i would boo the sh!t out of him (b/c i would think he was a pos). but, since i have little interest in the cavs, ill just say he was a typical businessman - there's no loyalty in the nba.

 

[lsman]

Boozer has same the same agency as..... Kobe. :Q
Will like to see (the firework) when he and LeBron James play in the Olympics

 

[austin316]

Originally posted by: Ranger X
Boozer did backstab but I don't see a reason why he has to be bound to a verbal agreement.

Here is a scenario. Let's say you're working for a company as a contractor, making $12/hour. You've been there for 2 years and you've worked your a$$ off. Management has noticed your great performance and promises you a job that pays say .. 60k/year if you stick around another year as a contractor. You think, 60k/year is great and gladly accept by means of a verbal agreement. Then comes a company that offers you 100k/year but wants you to start right away. Would you decline the 100k offer just because you don't want to piss off the people at the current company? Do you try and be a "nice guy", have loyalty, and stick around as a contractor for 1 more year? You would take the 100k job because you, along with everyone else, is looking out for their own best interest. Boozer is just looking out for himself and his family.

Totally agree. I'm pissed at Boozer, but I would have done the same thing.

Originally posted by: NeoV
wow are some of you basketball idiots..

if you don't know who he is, why bother even posting in this thread?

Comparing Boozer to ........Juwan Howard? My god that is insane - Howard averages 7 boards a game, not 10, is awful defensively, and isn't half the player Boozer is.

In the very first post there is an error - 2nd round picks don't get a 3 year contract - hardly ever - 1st round picks get a guaranteed 3 yr deal, 2nd round picks have no such guarantee - in fact, I can't recall another 2nd round pick who got a three year deal like this.

This is somewhat similar to the situation that led to Gilbert Arenas leaving Golden St - only the problem with him was that he did so well, and he was only signed to a one-year deal in the first place (since he was a 2nd round pick), so he was unrestricted, and the Warriors couldn't afford him.

Yes, this is a major bludner by the Cavs, but I still think they will make the necessary cap adjustments to match the offer (which they have the right to do - he is only a restricted free agent at this point). They are going to have to practically give away some players though - other teams will make them pay! They can also trade players for "exception" salary spots - for example, the Rockets have nearly 7Mill of exception money available to them this year, that they can trade - so you might see something like a DeJuan Wagner to Houston deal to get the Cavs that money for their cap. They may even have to trade Big Z now, and get little in return in terms of players.

I obviously haven't seen the details of the Jazz offer, but it is likely front-loaded to make it harder for the Cavs to match.

Keep in mind that Boozer controlled NONE of this until the Cavs LET him out of his contract for the upcoming season - that coming as a result of the Cavs, Boozer, and his agent talking about his long-term future with the team after next season. What I don't get is why there was any rush to do this now - why not just wait until next season, when he would have been an unrestricted free agent, and then you would have been able, as the Cavs, to offer him more money than any other team could, and you are allowed to exceed the cap to re-sign your own free agents? Looks like they were trying to keep his salary down in the 05/06 - 08/09 years. Still, if the guy gave his word, and there was some sort of agreement, this is shady stuff.

If the Cavs do lose Boozer, Paxson HAS to go. I still say there is more to this story - should be an interesting week around here!

Paxson must go. I agree. At first I was extremely pissed at Boozer, but the more I think about it, the Cavs made one of the dumbest decisions I have ever heard of. The basically tried to save $10 Million and ended up losing a lot lot more. (in terms of a quality player and getting nothing in return for him, along with pissing off the fan base.)

Finally, NeoV, you seem very knowledgeable about NBA contracts and deals. Can you point me to a link that shows the Cavs players and their salaries compared to whatever the cap is next year. I find it hard to believe that they are near going over, when they have a very young team of players who can't make that much money yet (like wagner and lebron) and without any large free-agent signings. How can a team like Dallas afford Dirk, Jamison, Finley, Walker, Nash etc.


<------ very bitter because I'm a cavs fan. they had a solid nucleus for next year with rookie Luke Jackson, an improving Wagner, a hard working Diop, and a very solid point guard in McGinnis, to go along with their 3 all-stars, 'Bron, Boozer and Z.

 

[HamSupLo]

If i was booze, i would take the money. Basketball is risky for the players....hell he could get injured and never play again. Better to take the money from the Jazz...it's GUARANTEED money!

 

[adelphi]

i'ma rockets fan but say after the era of domination by tmac + yao

lebron + co. will starting getting trophies and the jazz team doctors will still not be able to
find a vertebrae in boozers' xray

 

[kalster]

Why just NBA players, I think most players from most sports would do it, 28 million is a lot of moolah

 

[rchiu]

Originally posted by: Ranger X
Boozer did backstab but I don't see a reason why he has to be bound to a verbal agreement.

Here is a scenario. Let's say you're working for a company as a contractor, making $12/hour. You've been there for 2 years and you've worked your a$$ off. Management has noticed your great performance and promises you a job that pays say .. 60k/year if you stick around another year as a contractor. You think, 60k/year is great and gladly accept by means of a verbal agreement. Then comes a company that offers you 100k/year but wants you to start right away. Would you decline the 100k offer just because you don't want to piss off the people at the current company? Do you try and be a "nice guy", have loyalty, and stick around as a contractor for 1 more year? You would take the 100k job because you, along with everyone else, is looking out for their own best interest. Boozer is just looking out for himself and his family.

I would agree with you if it is only two teams bidding for Boozer's service. Boozer definitely has the right to look out for his interest and go with the highest bidder.

The problem here is, Boozer lied to get the Cavalier make him a free agent. He said he would sign with them, and he told the Cavalier fun he would stay with the team, if the team renegotiated his contract that would have paid him $690,000 this year. That was the only reason Cavalier did what they did. They did a favor for Boozer and his family because of his word. The problem was that Cavalier couldn't have a written agreement because of the NBA labor rules, and they trusted Boozer with a verbal commitment. And the rest is history.

Yes Boozer did not violated any law by leaving Cavalier in the cold. But it doesn't mean it is ethically correct. I am not so sure he made the right financial move either. He was loved in Cleveland and would have many local/national endorsment opp. playing together with LeBron James. You do notice Cleveland game is broadcast more with LeBron on the team do you. I don't think it would be that difficult to make up for that 28 mil from endorsment/advertising over the 6 year.

Going to Utah, he will have to re-establish himself. And because of this bad publicity, if he does not live up to the big expectation, he will loose the fans really quickly.

As for me, an NBA fan, I would not want watch any game that he plays, or touch any product he endorses, just because what he represents. I know not everyone believes in this, but I do think honesty and integrity counts for something.

 

[isekii]

Originally posted by: rchiu

Originally posted by: Ranger X
Boozer did backstab but I don't see a reason why he has to be bound to a verbal agreement.

Here is a scenario. Let's say you're working for a company as a contractor, making $12/hour. You've been there for 2 years and you've worked your a$$ off. Management has noticed your great performance and promises you a job that pays say .. 60k/year if you stick around another year as a contractor. You think, 60k/year is great and gladly accept by means of a verbal agreement. Then comes a company that offers you 100k/year but wants you to start right away. Would you decline the 100k offer just because you don't want to piss off the people at the current company? Do you try and be a "nice guy", have loyalty, and stick around as a contractor for 1 more year? You would take the 100k job because you, along with everyone else, is looking out for their own best interest. Boozer is just looking out for himself and his family.

I would agree with you if it is only two teams bidding for Boozer's service. Boozer definitely has the right to look out for his interest and go with the highest bidder.

The problem here is, Boozer lied to get the Cavalier make him a free agent. He said he would sign with them, and he told the Cavalier fun he would stay with the team, if the team renegotiated his contract that would have paid him $690,000 this year. That was the only reason Cavalier did what they did. They did a favor for Boozer and his family because of his word. The problem was that Cavalier couldn't have a written agreement because of the NBA labor rules, and they trusted Boozer with a verbal commitment. And the rest is history.

Yes Boozer did not violated any law by leaving Cavalier in the cold. But it doesn't mean it is ethically correct. I am not so sure he made the right financial move either. He was loved in Cleveland and would have many local/national endorsment opp. playing together with LeBron James. You do notice Cleveland game is broadcast more with LeBron on the team do you. I don't think it would be that difficult to make up for that 28 mil from endorsment/advertising over the 6 year.

Going to Utah, he will have to re-establish himself. And because of this bad publicity, if he does not live up to the big expectation, he will loose the fans really quickly.

As for me, an NBA fan, I would not want watch any game that he plays, or touch any product he endorses, just because what he represents. I know not everyone believes in this, but I do think honesty and integrity counts for something.

I dont think Boozer has to worry about his fan base.
He probably doesn't have much of a following. He's not Kobe, Jordan, Garnett