[Yyzlin]

I'll take Boozer in this one, especially after a significant offensive improvement from him. He's not quite the main defensive focus like Randolph is, but he is still the first offensive option for the Jazz now and his efficiency ridiculously dwarfs Randolphs. Not to mention that Boozer just has much better offensive awareness. Defensively, Boozer gets a slight edge but not much. Rebounding is a wash.

[Minstrel]

Originally posted by Pan Mengtu!


What has changed from last year? They lost no jump shooters that I can recall.

Rasheed Wallace not being there has changed. After Wallace left the team, Randolph has had markedly more trouble. Wallace drew more attention and his game meshed well with Randolph, especially his ability to hit mid-range and perimeter shot.

Boozer has a lot more help around him, like Harpring and Giricek as shooters and Kirilenko as a decent offensive player. Boozer's offense doesn't rely on touches and he doesn't have the type of game that could convert more touches into points. He generally gets points against broken defense, like on put-backs or when he's wide open.

[Ron Mexico]

Zach Randolph wasn't even invited so don't say that BS "where was he this summer" stuff

[Yyzlin]

Originally posted by Minstrel!
Rasheed Wallace not being there has changed. After Wallace left the team, Randolph has had markedly more trouble. Wallace drew more attention and his game meshed well with Randolph, especially his ability to hit mid-range and perimeter shot.

Randolph actually shot better after the All-Star break last year, shooting .497 compared to a .485 season average. Wallace was only there for eight games after the All-Star break. That said, I do expect Randolph's FG% to increase some bit, perhaps leveling off at a .470-480 area.

Boozer has a lot more help around him, like Harpring and Giricek as shooters and Kirilenko as a decent offensive player. Boozer's offense doesn't rely on touches and he doesn't have the type of game that could convert more touches into points. He generally gets points against broken defense, like on put-backs or when he's wide open.

People really underestimate Boozer. He's really shown a big improvement, melding a solid post game and a 10-15 jumper. I mean, the guy is only getting 3 offensive rebounds a game. He has to be getting points elsewhere. He's no Kenyon Martin.

[Tragedy]

Better Player: Boozer

Better Talent: Randolph.

Keep in mind I wouldn't want either of them to lead my team, I see them both as second tier stars anyways, so put them next to a great wing player.

[Minstrel]

Originally posted by Yyzlin!

People really underestimate Boozer. He's really shown a big improvement, melding a solid post game and a 10-15 jumper. I mean, the guy is only getting 3 offensive rebounds a game. He has to be getting points elsewhere. He's no Kenyon Martin.

Admittedly, I haven't seen a lot of Boozer this season. Last season, his offensive game was really subpar against set defense. He got his points in transition, on put-backs and on wide-open scores off dishes.

What I had seen of him this year didn't suggest he was a lot better in the post, though his jumper did seem better.

[Yyzlin]

Originally posted by Minstrel!
Admittedly, I haven't seen a lot of Boozer this season. Last season, his offensive game was really subpar against set defense. He got his points in transition, on put-backs and on wide-open scores off dishes.

What I had seen of him this year didn't suggest he was a lot better in the post, though his jumper did seem better.

I really don't agree that it was subpar against set defense. He never really demanded it in a set defense, and if he did, he did well. Now that he has gotten more touches, as well as developed his offensive game further, he has boosted his PPG while maintaining his FG%. And I'm not sure why getting points on put-backs is a negative either. Randolph grabs just as many offensive boards as Boozer. What is it saying when Boozer is better at cashing those in for points? It seems to me that getting points off put backs is a huge positive, creating points off other teammates miscues.

[Pan Mengtu]

Just to add to what Yyzlin is saying, the fact that Randolph needs shooters to take pressure off of him, and needs a certain number of touches to be effective is the main argument here against him.

Boozer has succeeded for two seperate styles of play. Neither of these guys are franchise level players, so the fact that Boozer is more versatile and doesn't get in the way is what makes him the better player. He's also added a Malone-esque jumper to his game.

[CrGiants]

This whole thing about "touches" is ridiculous. Go back and watch most of last season, pre-Rasheed trade, as well as a couple games this year. Z-Bo's points were hard-earned, as many of them came off of rebounds. The ball rarely ran through him. As he started to score more, the team transitioned to having the offense run through him.

Bottom line, dude get his whether the offense runs through him or not.

[Trader Ed]

Zach is getting better all around in his game. Starting to pass more out of the double teams, and be more team oriented. He actually is benefitting IMHO with Rahim in the lineup. Together they are a pretty formidable frontcourt.

As you all know Zach is pretty relentless in his offensive rebounds. But I bet 3-4 of those a game are just his own misses. Its not stat padding, just being an agressive player. He is drawing a lot of attention by the defense of course. This is forcing his game outside a bit at times, and he is shooting jumpers, which do not always go in, thus lowering his FG% a bit.

Once Portland gets more of an outside threat via trade, it will open up Zach's game more.

[Minstrel]

Originally posted by Yyzlin!

And I'm not sure why getting points on put-backs is a negative either.

Getting points on put-backs is not the negative. The negative is that Boozer has generally been poor at creating his own shot. It's not a negative to get points against "broken defense"...it is a negative to be poor against set defense.

Randolph grabs just as many offensive boards as Boozer. What is it saying when Boozer is better at cashing those in for points? It seems to me that getting points off put backs is a huge positive, creating points off other teammates miscues.

Actually, I didn't say Boozer is better at cashing in offensive rebounds for points. Randolph is tremendous at that too. What I was saying is that those (and fastbreak points, wide-open lay-ups created by teammates) comprise almost all of Boozer's offense. Randolph has that and a better ability to score against set defense.