Carlos Boozer just doesn’t seem to get it

For a graduate from such a distinguished university, Carlos Boozer doesn’t say smart things.

Carlos Boozer has shown several times, that he just doesn’t get it.  I am not going to go into details, but if you know anything about the Jazz and/or Carlos Boozer, then you know what I am talking about.  To summarize:

-Carlos Boozer, sitting injured on the bench, last December, tells ESPN’s Chris Sheridan, that he is going to get a raise, regardless. That is a really good way to appeal to your fanbase and create chemistry with your teammates.

-In June, Boozer goes on Jim Rome is Burning and tells Jim that the Jazz played “great” against the Lakers and that he was finally 100% healthy. I am going to go out on a limb and say that you don’t play “great” and get killed by a team in 5 games.  Real athletes who care about winning, would be horribly unsatisfied with the way the series turned out.  Boozer played well in that series.  He meant to say, that he played great.

-In October, Boozer makes up for his comment to Jim Rome and clarifies by saying that he played well against the Lakers, but that essentially his teammates couldn’t carry the load. Again, Boozer had some nice games against the Lakers, but saying he played well is a huge stretch.  But more importantly, you never, ever say that you did your best, but your team isn’t good enough to support you…unless you are Kobe Bryant or Dirk Nowitzki.  But at least those guys are the best players on their team.  Still inexcusable in my book, but less so.

Here is the kicker:  Carlos hasn’t learned from any of these past comments.

Last week after the San Antonio win, Boozer was back to his old self, tooting his own horn.

“I think when I play well our team plays better,” Boozer said. “… We all try to play well but when [certain] guys do, there’s a trickle-down effect — definitely.”

Puhleaaase.  I will overlook the wanton hubris in the statement and the fact that his statement is unfactual.  If you look at the history of Boozer with the Jazz, Carlos Boozer’s production is not linked to the Jazz’s success.  In fact, it may be inversely proportional.  You heard it here first.

But Boozer was essentially calling his play very important to the Jazz’s success by saying that when he plays well, his good play trickles down to the rest of the team.  And this was right after Boozer shot over 50% for the first time in the season.  In fact, despite his good shooting effort against the Spurs, Boozer’s shooting percentage up to that point was an underwhelming 43% from the field.  But what Boozer doesn’t get is that of course his play was having a huge effect on how well the Jazz play, because he was taking so many shots.  Boozer shot 15 shots a game through 5 games, second on the team behind only Deron Williams.  Kirilenko shot only 9 a game and Mehmet Okur took 11.5 shots thru those games.

If Wes Matthews took as many shots as Carlos Boozer did, then he would be able to make the same statement that if he played well, then the Jazz would play well.  It isn’t because of his great game, but really the volume of shots taken.

So Boozer should have said, “If I play well, the team plays well, because I take so many shots.  It has a trickle down effect on the team.”

Boozer is right, though.  I do believe that his play has had a trickle-down effect on the team.  Just not a positive one.