# The "Real" Reason Don Nelson Was Fired, He Wanted A Shaq for Ewing Deal!



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

> Nelson was an outsider, an agent of change, who didn’t believe the Knicks had much of a future with Patrick Ewing, then 33 and angling for a rich contract extension, as their franchise player. Nelson was thinking out of the box, and big. He wanted the Knicks to chase Shaquille O’Neal, who was playing his last season in Orlando.
> 
> 
> “I had coached Shaq in the world championships in ’94 and established a pretty good relationship with him,” Nelson said. “I knew he wanted to go elsewhere and so I brought this up a meeting with the Garden people. I said: ‘He would come to New York. It’s going to be Los Angeles or us. And if we give ’em Ewing, it would be the best deal Orlando could make.’
> “Well, somehow that got back to Ewing and after that, I was toast.”


http://select.nytimes.com/gst/tsc.h...sQ26(mifQ3DQ26(Q7BQ7BsbA(O(Q3D8Q5DQ3E5Q3DLQ7B

You guys believe this? I always thought Ewing was mad because Mason was featured more especially when Donnie used him as a point foward. Just imagine if that rumor was real, we could have had Shaq. ::brings chills to my spine::


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

USSKittyHawk said:


> http://select.nytimes.com/gst/tsc.h...sQ26(mifQ3DQ26(Q7BQ7BsbA(O(Q3D8Q5DQ3E5Q3DLQ7B
> 
> You guys believe this? I always thought Ewing was mad because Mason was featured more especially when Donnie used him as a point foward. Just imagine if that rumor was real, we could have had Shaq. ::brings chills to my spine::



To be honest with you, I wouldn't have a hard time *not* believing it because of who Don Nelson is. He's always an innovator and constantly thinking outside the box, so something like this would not surprise me. Just to back all this up, Nelson was fired with one of the best winning records in the league at the time because of Anthony Mason, a role player? This seems to clarify alot and is unfortunate we clung to Patrick so long. Looking back on things that was a huge mistake.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

Could you post the article?


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

Geez man. Scary to think about.


----------



## ChosenFEW (Jun 23, 2005)

it still took shaq someone named kobe before he won any rings.....


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

ChosenFEW said:


> it still took shaq someone named kobe before he won any rings.....


I'm sure the additions of Spree and Houston would have been enough.


----------



## ChosenFEW (Jun 23, 2005)

TwinkieFoot said:


> I'm sure the additions of Spree and Houston would have been enough.



dude didn't you see 'back to the future'.... any small thing that changes the past has dramatic effects in the future:biggrin:.....so probably we wouldve had a different set of players....we wouldnt have gave allan the 100 million because we wouldve been paying something like that to shaq....If nelson was still coach what makes you think he would take a chance on coach beater spree.....


things change man


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

ChosenFEW said:


> dude didn't you see 'back to the future'.... any small thing that changes the past has dramatic effects in the future:biggrin:.....so probably we wouldve had a different set of players....we wouldnt have gave allan the 100 million because we wouldve been paying something like that to shaq....If nelson was still coach what makes you think he would take a chance on coach beater spree.....
> 
> 
> things change man


I agree....good point!


----------



## da1nonly (May 8, 2006)

scary thought...


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

ChosenFEW said:


> dude didn't you see 'back to the future'.... any small thing that changes the past has dramatic effects in the future:biggrin:.....so probably we wouldve had a different set of players....we wouldnt have gave allan the 100 million because we wouldve been paying something like that to shaq....If nelson was still coach what makes you think he would take a chance on coach beater spree.....
> 
> 
> things change man


Those are all valid points but I'm still not sure they would have ultimately effected everything that happened. Houston was already a Knick. We probably would have been left with all the pieces involved with the Spree trade to make at a later time. In other words, the pieces would have been there to make the same move again. Worst case scenario, we still would have had Allan Houston as the no.2 player who still would have been locked up with the team for several years. When Dolan took over after '99, he personally made a decree that he'd never lose a player based on money which is evident by Houston's ridiculous contract still on our payroll. The fact that our payroll has reached the $100 million threshold and beyond, I think it's safe to say that money would not have been an issue here.


----------



## ChosenFEW (Jun 23, 2005)

TwinkieFoot said:


> Houston was already a Knick. We probably would have been left with all the pieces involved with the Spree trade to make at a later time. In other words, the pieces would have been there to make the same move again. Worst case scenario, we still would have had Allan Houston as the no.2 player who still would have been locked up with the team for several years..


didnt we sign houston in 1996 when he was a free agent.....nelson coached the 95-96 season and was replaced by van gundy that same season too i think....

so if im not mistaken houston came after the fact that nelson had been fired, thus management didn't see eye to eye with his vision.....

so......that is why we're pretty much screwed today


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

ChosenFEW said:


> didnt we sign houston in 1996 when he was a free agent.....nelson coached the 95-96 season and was replaced by van gundy that same season too i think....
> 
> so if im not mistaken houston came after the fact that nelson had been fired, thus management didn't see eye to eye with his vision.....
> 
> so......that is why we're pretty much screwed today


Actually your right. I forgot all about that fact. Still though, the thought of playing next to one of the young up and coming centers, who also just happened to make the Finals would not have likely discouraged Shaq from signing (who would have had a compareable contract to Ewing). Things would probably have been effected from being in Shaq but I can only see the positives at this point, lol.


----------

