Derrick Rose says the Bulls need a big; would have liked Boozer

According to the Salt Lake Tribune:

Rose said he was "very surprised" that Boozer wasn't traded to Chicago.

"It would have been great," Rose said. "Boozer, he's a great guy, a
great veteran. He would have helped the team out a lot. So if he would
have came on to this team, we would have liked him as a player."

Added Rose: "We need a big, he's a big. He can pop and shoot, he's
a strong post player, too, so he's versatile, and that's what we need
on this team."

Forman added that while
he had trade talks with every team in the league, he was inclined to
bring back the same team that gave Boston everything it could handle in
losing a seven-game first-round playoff series.

"We like the team that we have," Forman said, "and really this
summer we had a lot of opportunities to change our roster if we wanted
to and we wanted to let this roster continue to grow together."

First, it's interesting that Rose specifically stated how much they need a big man.  Not that he's wrong or throwing anyone under the bus specifically, but it's still a statement that doesn't necessarily reflect positively on his front court teammates. 

I like that though, because he's clearly right.   The Bulls do need a big man.  Especially an offensive oriented one, and someone who's strong and physical. 

The inference that Forman wanted to come back with the same team is funny given that they lost last season's best player.  Clearly they aren't coming back with the same team.   I think a lot of Bulls fans, including this one, would have enjoyed them coming back with the same team. 

However, Gar wasn't quoted in using that phrase, so whether it's an inference, impression, piece of another quote, or creative writing by the reporter is up for debate.   He said he wanted the guys they have to be able to grow together.  I'm sure that's still true of everyone else whom we did bring back.

Either way, there's probably no need to read to continue to rehash the Gordon post-mortem.   The Bulls liked Ben Gordon, but not at 12 million a year, and they positioned themselves to have cap room next year (a wise move) while putting together a team that still has a lot of potential this year. I just found the idea that we were bringing back the same team strange, because we lost (debatably) last season's best player.  Good long term strategy perhaps, same team?  Definitely not.


Leave a comment
  • He's not wrong, but the Boozer thing isn't over yet. There's no rush.

  • In reply to MarkDeeks:

    Well it would have been nice to have him for training camp to get used to the team instead of making an in season move.

  • In reply to TheStig:

    It would, but Utah doesn't hold any significant leverage here, and they'll hold even less as time goes on. So the Bulls can afford to play the long game.

  • Not to mention the Bulls also lost to a team that was missing it's best player. So, whille the series was great it's not like the Bulls took a real contender to the end.
    Mark how was your first live NBA game?

    Doug what do you think of Roses shot? I know it was a small sample size, but it looks like he's made his release point higher. It looks much more fluid. Also, 2 of his 3 turnovers in that game were Noahs fault.

  • Yeahh...we're in no way bringing back the same team...And as Hoover mentioned, Boston was missing its best player. To me we're either swept or go out 4-1 with KG playing in that series.

    To me their in a good position to get Boozer if they want him, except they'll have to resign him after this season, and I'm not sure if Boozer is a good long term option. He would have been a great one year rental this season, but I'm not so sure after this season. My sights are still set on Bosh or Amare before anyone else.

  • If the price is suitably low, it would still be worth it. Utah's backed into a corner; they can't just waste their trade chip, and yet they'd like to keep the high quality player, but given how apathetic the two parties seem to be towards each other now, they can't just sit about.

  • In reply to MarkDeeks:

    The only way a Bulls Jazz trade happens is if a 3rd team with cap room gets involved.

  • They almost certainly were. But that's the kind of deal that may be revisitablish at the deadline.

  • In reply to MarkDeeks:

    Well that was a rumor on ESPN at one point. I didnt exactly buy it as it sounded like a complete ripoff at the time. I figured a draft pick or two would have to be added to the deal.

    This season the Bulls have Brad Miller's expiring to dangle around as well as Jerome James if Utah truly wants to save money. Tyrus could been given to them if they want more PF depth (Thats if they want to give him a contract next season).

  • In reply to MarkDeeks:

    How about this trade?

    To Bulls: Carlos Boozer
    To Jazz: Tyrus Thomas and Jerome James

    Wouldn't that work out nice for both teams?

  • In reply to MarkDeeks:


    PG - Williams, SG - Brewer, SF - Millsap, PF - Thomas, C - Okur


    PG - Rose, SG - Salmons, SF - Deng, PF - Boozer, C - Noah

  • In reply to MarkDeeks:


    It works for the Jazz because they need to cut salary, which they would because James will be gone and Thomas has a Qualifying offer coming to him. Also, it would give them more defense down-low.

    It works for the Bulls because they really need a mature big-man, who can post-up and rebound in the paint.

  • Doug what kind of in season deal with the Bulls do you think the Jazz would be willing to accept? Also what kind of long term deal would you be willing to give Boozer, 4 years $60 million?

  • In reply to Basghetti80:

    Boozer isn't getting 15 mill a year unless he puts up a 20/10 year with 7+ games. He isn't going to get that chance in Utah with Milsap being the future. I would say boozer will be available for 10-12 mill per in the offseason.

  • In reply to Basghetti80:


    Did you happen to see what DeJuan Blair did last night?

    vs. Houston - 16 points and 19 rebounds in 22 mins.

    Miller, Gibson, Noah and Richard had 18 total vs. Utah. I hope the Bulls didn't make a mistake passing on that kid.

  • Doug,

    Personally, I would prefer to have Chris Bosh or David Lee on the Bulls, instead of Ty Thomas and/or Carlos Boozer. However, Boozer might be the most get-a-bull, so to speak, in a trade. Don't forget that Ty Thomas has that qualifying offer, which Utah could take advantage of. It's not like he's an unrestricted free-agent like Boozer. If Utah is going to lose Boozer for nothing via free-agency, they may want to trade him before the trade deadline. Chicago does make some sense.

  • I can't imgine the price being that low. If it was james and tyrus it probably included our pics too. Thats just too cheap for him even if he is a rental.

Leave a comment