Skip to content

Utah picks up option of Jazz’s answer to Rajon Rondo

June 30, 2011

You can get the facts, specifics, and analysis elsewhere at places where people know what they’re talking about.

The Jazz picking up CJ’s option was really just an actionary* segue for me to post this–

*As opposed to verbal or written. I know. Completely inaccurate usage of the word “actionary.” Moving on…

–Wait. First, Rajon Rondo.

OK, now we have the Utah Jazz’s answer to Rajon Rondo. [drumroll] CJ Miles!

He did. And it wasn’t just man purses…

…or coin purses.

It was everything Louis Vuitton had to offer. What up doe.

Question: Doesn’t CJ totally seem like the kind of LV fan that would buy an LV umbrella?


Extra credit reading: More on our Jazzmen’s and the NBA’s obsession with Louis Vuitton here.

In related news, the Jazz also picked up the options of Gordon Hayward and Derrick Favors.

Someone wanna enlighten me on the optiony specifics of Jeremy Evans’ second-rounder contract?

9 Comments leave one →
  1. Jazzy Girl permalink
    June 30, 2011 12:58 pm

    Please keep Jeremy!! I love that kid! He rocks, he flies above the rim, he works his butt off, he has a sweet whip, and he is so nice to me when I see him randomly throughout Salt Lake Valley! I love him so much!

    I was very happy to hear about GoGo HayHay and Favors. I am however undecided on CJ.

    Damn that kid! Could I please get some consistency. If he were more arrogant he would be the bomb! I would like to go back in time and keep Brewer. Or trade CJ for Wesley.

  2. udowado permalink
    June 30, 2011 9:26 pm

    I just recently found out that you were a girl- and now everything makes a whole lot more sense! (In a great way, of course!) In order to come to the defense of my fellow men- the LV “man purses” alluded to above and in the links are actually “toiletry bags” and will run a brother a cool 425 pounds (~$680). That just sounds manlier than any phrase with “purse” in it.


    CJ’s on his own with the fanny pack though. I love the site- keep up the great work.

    • June 30, 2011 10:24 pm

      Thanks :)

      So you’ve got me thinking. In my mind, a toiletry bag goes inside your luggage. If you’re carrying it out on its own, and especially if you’re not actually using it to cart toiletries around, that’s a man purse. Anyway, the reason I was referring to them as “man purses” was because that’s what Deron called them. Apparently, the difference lies in the number of zippers. (Fascinating, right?)

      From a Trib blog post 3+ years ago:

      This led to an unprecedented declaration from Deron Williams, who announced with gusto: “I have a man-purse.”

      The big difference (all the Jazz players have Louis Vuitton bags) is size. Williams bag has two zippers and is much larger. Okur’s has one zipper and is considerably smaller. Hence the difference between a toiletry bag and a man-purse.

      Yet Williams seemed to delight in bragging about having a man-purse (he was wearing a Gucci stocking cap and Gucci shoes).

      • SurlyMae permalink
        June 30, 2011 11:26 pm

        A toiletry bag definitely goes inside the luggage, unless it encloses itself nicely and hangs from the outside of the luggage – whether it’s high fashion or not. No way do you carry a toiletry bag like a purse, unless you’re on your way from the dorm room to the communal shower. Maybe ‘man bag’ would be more acceptable?
        Love your angles on stuff moni, and your sense of humor is bitchin’.

        • udowado permalink
          July 1, 2011 12:08 am

          Interesting thoughts. I would have assumed that it would be dependent on the purpose for which the bag was being employed. If it literally is their toiletry bag for home games that they are using to transfer their bathing/shaving/teeth brushing supplies with them to the game to freshen up after than I’d still call it a toiletry bag. If they have their wallet, cell phone, lip balm and tampons (I’m looking at you crying AK) then it’s indefensibly a murse/man purse. In my mind I always envision a shoulder strap (or a wrist strap like on my wife’s day purse) being requisite for a man purse to be labeled as such. The presence of the strap is the deal breaker- maybe that’s just me though. That also takes us to the gray area of messenger bags though…

          In general though I would borrow from SurlyMae’s logic above and say that home games literally are, dependent on the content of their “bags”, just them commuting from their homes/apartments to the communal shower.

          Either way this is an interesting start to my day. I certainly didn’t anticipate that I would be having an intellectual conversation about man purses this morning…

          Maybe this will help shed some light on the situation (excuse the language)

  3. udowado permalink
    July 1, 2011 1:40 am

    Stupid iphone messed up the link…here it is.

    I also think the man purse/ messenger bag issue is simply a bag:strap ratio issue. If the strap is more significant than the bag = man purse. The larger the bag and smaller the shoulder strap => overnight bag/duffle bag/messenger bag/briefcase/satchel.

    • July 1, 2011 10:00 am

      So the final conclusion is, if the bag itself is small in size and has a shoulder strap or is carried tucked under the arm, it’s a man purse. if it is held by a short strap, it is either a man purse or a toiletry bag depending on its contents. does that sum up all of the comments?

      /ignoring the AK comment lol

  4. Jazzy Girl permalink
    July 1, 2011 2:37 pm

    Can we get back to the real issue at hand?


Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: