Carlos Boozer Trade Rumors: Latest Buzz Surrounding Chicago Bulls Big Man
The Chicago Bulls' (and their fans) relationship with Carlos Boozer has been tenuous at best since he came over in a sign-and-trade deal back in 2010. He hasn’t quite lived up to the five-year, $75 million contract he received, and it’s a large reason why his name is a constant subject of trade rumors and as a potential amnesty victim.
As per ESPN’s Marc Stein, the latest chatter involves the veteran power forward being dealt to the Toronto Raptors in exchange for Andrea Bargnani, who was the No. 1 overall pick in the 2006 draft.
The insider found that both teams are “considering the move”, which would have to involve a number of smaller contracts to make the salaries match.
The Italian forward is on the books for $10 million in 2012-13, and his next two seasons are guaranteed for a total of $33 million.
K.C. Johnson of the Chicago Tribune noted that Nate Robinson and John Lucas III are two of the minor players that this possible transaction could encompass, if anything comes to fruition.
Ever since Rudy Gay landed north of the border in late January, there have been whispers that the Raps ownership is willing to venture into luxury tax territory in order to build a contender.
Bargnani has been struggling this season—missing 26 games with an elbow injury. He is averaging just 15.9 points and 4.3 rebounds—which must factor in as to why GM Bryan Colangelo confirmed that the sweet-shooting big man is openly being shopped.
Boozer isn’t having an astonishingly bad season, but he’s only averaging 15.7 points and 9.4 rebounds—certainly not justifiable considering his $15 million salary.
What should the Bulls do?
Both Boozer and Bargnani could benefit from the change of scenery, which is the likely reason for the two organizations to apparently be at the bargaining table and trying to find a satisfactory scenario to make something happen.
With the Feb. 21 deadline less than two weeks away, the clock is ticking on the two parties to hammer out an agreeable trade.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?