Richard Saunders | 12:01 a.m. July 17, 2009
I enjoyed the article. A nice way of looking at it. Only one problem: Peter Parker didn't say that, it was his uncle Ben.
Recommend
Recommendations: 0
Anonymous | 2:16 a.m. July 17, 2009
How nice. I think we got needed a Harley, and settled for a moped because it is cheaper. And we overpaid for the moped.
Recommend
Recommendations: 0
Robin | 5:54 a.m. July 17, 2009
Great points.

Literally how you should judge a player.

Don't let us down Paul Millsap!!!
Recommend
Recommendations: 0
@ Anon | 7:52 a.m. July 17, 2009
I'll take a moped on the street over a Harley in the shop any day
Recommend
Recommendations: 0
Henry Drummond | 10:20 a.m. July 17, 2009
Good to have Paul back. I think he did a better job than Boozer on both ends of the court. I think he'll do a great job starting for the Jazz.
Recommend
Recommendations: 0
TROY | 1:29 p.m. July 17, 2009
I am surprised you seem to think portland did such a evil thing to make a offer to paul isn't that part of the process? that they thought enough of paul to do so should encourage you, that someone else thought that way of him.To cry about having to pay him what someone else thought he was worth is petty. if you don't want to pay that much don't portland will
Recommend
Recommendations: 0
A fan in AZ | 1:32 p.m. July 17, 2009
The "toxic" reference was made by a beat writer in Oregon. People forget who said it.

Boozer was a good player for the Jazz. Now, he'll play elsewhere. But he arrived in a bit of a ... less than tasteful way in leaving Cleveland. Jazz writers need to remember that before they start criticizing other franchises for also playing by the rules. Talking about other teams as bullies does us no good, and saying that matching is standing up to them is comical.

The Jazz didn't want to pay Millsap what he got. That's business. Spinning it now to just a million or so more is ... comical. Stop that.

Hoping Millsap earns his pay.
Recommend
Recommendations: 0
Don | 2:03 p.m. July 17, 2009
The "toxic" reference was made to suggest that it was designed to make it difficult for Utah to match. It did not imply any "pollution" or animosity. It was not a dirty move. It was simply the right move by a divisional rival who wanted a player that the Jazz won the rights to keep. That's all. Utah won. Portland lost, but they went into the deal believing it would be difficult to get Millsap.
Recommend
Recommendations: 0
Blazer Fan | 3:53 p.m. July 17, 2009
"But along came the Blazers and their deep-pockets owner, who delivered what was vividly described as a "toxic" contract offer. Who knew Oregon could be so ... polluted? The deal was front-loaded to make it difficult for the Jazz to match.

The Trail Blazers could have been meaner, but only if they'd unloaded a truck full of Bigfoot droppings on the ESA steps."

??? I've had the pleasure of good banter with Jazz fans over the years, good conference rivals. I've never heard ANY Jazz fans complain and whine as much as this Sally. Meaner?!? Portland polluted?!? Dropping dookie on the steps?!?

Brad Rock, take your ball and go home. This is a professional sports league, not your 4th grade intermural team. Gimme a break you pansy. I'm glad you are one of the few that can't handle competition.
Recommend
Recommendations: 0
In Sports Across Site

Check out Jazzland for the latest Utah Jazz insights from Jody Genessy.