# Just a thought...



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

Dallas trades: PF Antoine Walker (14.0 ppg, 8.3 rpg, 4.5 apg in 34.6 minutes) 
SF Antawn Jamison (14.8 ppg, 6.3 rpg, 0.9 apg in 29.0 minutes) 
Dallas receives: C Shaquille O'Neal (21.5 ppg, 11.5 rpg, 2.9 apg in 36.8 minutes) 
Change in team outlook: -7.3 ppg, -3.1 rpg, and -2.5 apg. 

L.A. Lakers trades: C Shaquille O'Neal (21.5 ppg, 11.5 rpg, 2.9 apg in 36.8 minutes) 
L.A. Lakers receives: PF Antoine Walker (14.0 ppg, 8.3 rpg, 4.5 apg in 82 games) 
SF Antawn Jamison (14.8 ppg, 6.3 rpg, 0.9 apg in 82 games) 
Change in team outlook: +7.3 ppg, +3.1 rpg, and +2.5 apg. 

TRADE ACCEPTED

Does anyone think this could happen? The Lakers are looking to trade Shaq since he does not want to stay in LA playing second fiddle to Kobe in the offseason. Dallas needs a real center, and Shaq still has at least 3 years of production, brings offensive firepower AND defensive presence. This is jsut a thought. Walker has been a liablity for Dallas, but he has shown in Boston that he is capable of being a great player, and with Malone putting on age, the Lakers might could use him?


----------



## Chalie Boy (Aug 26, 2002)

It will never happen but it makes both teams look good

Lakers

C: MLE(Clark?),
PF: Walker
SF: Jamison
SG: Kobe
PG: Payton

Dallas

C: Shaq
PF: Dirk
SF: Finley
SG: Daniels
PG: Nash

We will need to give more though Howard?


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

Well, you never know... it came when I was reading that Shaq demanded to be traded to Kuchpak after hearing that Mitch was going to do whatever he could to keep Kobe, even if it was to Shaq's expense..

I was thinking of throwing in Finley in the place of Jamison, so the Mavs could further play Howard, but then thought that the Lakers would never take Finley and his horrendous contract. Especially since they have Kobe at the 2, and they may start developing Walton at the 3. Plus, Finley does not deserve a contract that large, for someone who doesn't defend, rebound or pass. To be honest.


----------



## Tersk (Apr 9, 2004)

all me crazy but i dont particularily ant Shaq - all he will do is take the ball from Dirk


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>theo4002</b>!
> all me crazy but i dont particularily ant Shaq - all he will do is take the ball from Dirk


So let say you have a chance to win a championship but you wouldn't do that because people are taking away the ball from Dirk?


----------



## Mavs Dude (Jul 20, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>theo4002</b>!
> all me crazy but i dont particularily ant Shaq - all he will do is take the ball from Dirk


No what he can do is get the rebounds from all the missed 3s and put them back with authority and he would still average 20 some points per game.


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

See, my thought was that, Dallas is already a good team, but a good center that can be a defensive post presence, is exactly what they need to have a realistic chance at winning a championship. Though Shaq only has a few more years where he can dominate, the Mavs will definately be able to compete for a title within those years.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Get real guys...

The two teams with the potential to trade for Shaq are the Knicks and the mavs.

The knicks would have to offer Marbury and Tim Thomas and maybe Sweetney,who is gonna be a monster or KT..

You arent going to get Shaq for Antoine Walker and Jamison..Thats a joke..Maybe if you threw in Marquis Daniels...

or,the real possibilty would be Dirk and Antoine Walker or jamison

Would you guys do it??

You would be scary good for a couple of years

Shaq
Jamison
Finley
Nash
Daniels


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

Well you never know... 

After this season, the Lakers dynasty is about to break up and start rebuilding from near scratch around Kobe, whereas it had been built around Shaq before. They need good players, and Shaq has demanded to be traded after comments made by Laker GM Mitch Kuchpak. Well, in this trade, the Lakers get two All Star caliber players for one player who does not want to stay in LA for any longer. I think this is exactly what LA needs assuming Walker and Jamison can become affitted to the new system that will be put into place since Phil Jackson is gone. If Jamison and Walker end up good for them, they will be a championship caliber team. They will most likely both have starting roles and a larger part in the offense then they were in Dallas, where most of the firepower came from the big 3. Dallas will benefit as well, as they get rid of the surplus of talented fowards in return for what they REALLY need, a strong center and defensive presence in the post. Plus, I doubt the franchise would even think about trading Dirk. Hes young, and hes still got room to improve with the talent he has, whereas, Shaq is on the decline, but he will be better for the team than Walker and Jamison were.

This way, Dirk gets moved back to his natural Power Forward position. And will prove as even more of a threat as big men will be forced to guard the interior as well as the perimeter more carefully.


----------



## mavsman (Jun 11, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>theo4002</b>!
> all me crazy but i dont particularily ant Shaq - all he will do is take the ball from Dirk


OK, you're crazy. Shaq would be great here. Unlike the Lakers
we have a team full of good jump shooters. When you throw the
ball down to Shaq the other team is forced to help down low and
that leaves your shooters open.

The part I am not sure about is how Shaq and Nash fit together.
Nash likes to penatrate and for the most part the middle is open
for him to do that with our current offense. With Shaq in the
middle there is not as much room for penatration.


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>mavsman</b>!
> 
> The part I am not sure about is how Shaq and Nash fit together.
> Nash likes to penatrate and for the most part the middle is open
> ...


That may be a problem, but I think it makes for it. Give Shaq maybe 20 points a game plus his defensive play, and I think it makes up for it. 

I hate to admit it, but the way the Mavs are... when it comes to the playoffs, we're a joke. We don't play defense, and when our shooters aren't hot, we are pretty much done for. Wtih Shaq, we have interior offense, more chances for open outside shots, and interior defense which is what is hurting us most. We can contest shots on the outside, but once they throw the ball into someone in the post, thats an automatic two since there is no Maverick defending the basket.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

HELLO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Shaq for Antoine Walker and Antoine Jamison??????????

Am i missing something???Does the team with the most Antoines move up in the draft???

What are you guys thinking?????

And then you are concerned how Nash will fair with Deisel in the middle???
As opposed to Shaun Bradly??Najara???

face it...Ant trade for Shaq will involve Dirk,maybe Nash,maybe Daniels....

Walker stinks,and jamison isnt even a starter..

Cmon guys,nap time is over


----------



## Mavs Dude (Jul 20, 2003)

Why would we have to trade Dirk, maybe Nash and Daniels for Shaq while you only have to trade Marbury. Knicks have no chance at Shaq because Marbury is your only good player. Dirk is better Marbury and Steve is as good. Our deal is better because we give them their answer at SF and someone to replace Malone if he retires.


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>truth</b>!
> 
> Walker stinks,and jamison isnt even a starter..


Ok... Walker doesnt stink, he simply does not fit on Dallas, he averaged 20/8/5 with the Celtics. He can score, pass and rebound. Thats not bad, and he was their #2 offensive weapon. Well, on the Mavs, he plays 4th fiddle to Dirk, Nash and Fin, even at times Jamison. He doesn't stink, he could flourish on the Lakers as their number 2 man behind Kobe. 

Second, Jamison was only benched because they had to bench eitehr him or Walker, and he stepped up. He was a big time scorer with Golden State. He had 2 back to back 50 point games. Hes a very efficient scorer and is 3rd in the NBA in FG%. He averaged 25 ppg with GS. He is good, just because he isn't a starter for Dallas doesnt mean he isnt good. He is better than Devean George, Rick Fox, and Luke Walton. Also he is willing to sacrifice his numbers and his minutes to adjust to a different system.

Also, Payton may actually stay with the Lakers. I would hate seeing the Laker's dynasty die, and I'm looking at this trade through the both points of view. With the Walker and Jamison trade, they get two relatively young all star caliber talents, whereas with the Marbury trade, they get 1 and some filler. For a team that is about to rebuild itself around a new star player, I think that this deal is better. They already have a decent backcourt with Kobe and Payton (who may play better without PJax's triangle), but their front court is a mess.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

I think what the lakers would want in any trade is players who start at different positions..If the Glove resigns,that could kill the marbury deal...


The only reason I dont like the "Antoine squared" deal,is because they are both tweeners and that isnt what LA needs...

GS offering Van X and Damp is a better offer,the Nets offering Martin,Kittles and A Train is probably better


----------



## QRICH (Feb 2, 2004)

Get real. No way in hell does LA trade Shaq to Dallas for any package that does not include Dirk. It's not like you're trading for a "chris Webber" or a ZIllgauskas, this is Shaq! 


Keep dreaming

A more "realistic" package would be :

Dirk
Daniels
Jamison

for 

Shaq
Rush


----------



## Tersk (Apr 9, 2004)

Nope - i sure as hell hope Cuban doesnt trade Dirk.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

> Get real. No way in hell does LA trade Shaq to Dallas for any package that does not include Dirk



I agree......Its going to take a real superstar and additional talent to get shaq and not 2 tweeners in antoines ..

I do think the lakers wouls take young talent as well,but the only team who really has that and is lpossibly open to moving it is Indiana..

Bender,harrington and Artest is an interesting group,but you still have a huge salary mismatch


----------



## LionOfJudah (May 27, 2003)

If Phil is back Walker and Jamison would fit perfect into the Triangle offense seeing as they are tweeners as they've been called. Both players are all-stars reguardless what you want to say. To say they suck is just ignorant and about the dumbest thing i've seen since Tom Tolbert's neon suit. Anyways, if this is the best offer the Lakers get for Shaq I wouldn't be suprised if it went through. Landing two all-stars is better than landing a Tim Thomas and a star or Kittles, who mind you plays the 2 which Kobe has locked up, and KMart. With Malone leaving and Devon George still sucking it'd make more sense filling the 3 and 4. Its only logical but not everyone thinks that way. 

Personally I'd hate to have Shaq because he's one of my least favorite players. I just hate his style of play. I'd rather have the other O'Neal who doesn't just foul his way through the paint.


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

Shaq is getting worse by the season, if you havent noticed. Hes still unstoppable, but his conditioning and production have declined. In 2 years, Dirk will most likely be better than Shaq. Its logical to trade Walker and Jamison for Shaq, the Lakers are rebuilding, and for a team who already has a player like Kobe, they don't need someone like Marbury or Nowtizki to come to share the spotlight. Especially since Kobe is now glad that he is the star, they dont need another franchise player like Marbury or Dirk. They need guys who can get the job done for them without worrying too much about their numbers. Jamison can do that, he will score, rebound and hustle. Walker will do the same, yes he did pout on the Mavs, but like I said, he was playing behind 4 players rather than just 1 or 2. On the Lakers, he'll just have to play 2nd fiddle to Kobe much like he did for Paul Pierce. Its much better for him to play there than in Dallas.


----------



## QRICH (Feb 2, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Drewbs</b>!
> Shaq is getting worse by the season, if you havent noticed. Hes still unstoppable, but his conditioning and production have declined. In 2 years, Dirk will most likely be better than Shaq. *Its logical to trade Walker and Jamison for Shaq*, the Lakers are rebuilding, and for a team who already has a player like Kobe, they don't need someone like Marbury or Nowtizki to come to share the spotlight. Especially since Kobe is now glad that he is the star, they dont need another franchise player like Marbury or Dirk. They need guys who can get the job done for them without worrying too much about their numbers. Jamison can do that, he will score, rebound and hustle. Walker will do the same, yes he did pout on the Mavs, but like I said, he was playing behind 4 players rather than just 1 or 2. On the Lakers, he'll just have to play 2nd fiddle to Kobe much like he did for Paul Pierce. Its much better for him to play there than in Dallas.


....Yeah, for Dallas. LA will get as much as they can for Shaq.


No Dirk, No Shaq

plain and simple


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

> No Dirk, No Shaq


So which deals do you think work for the lakers???


----------



## QRICH (Feb 2, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>truth</b>!
> 
> 
> So which deals do you think work for the lakers???


It wont be with Dallas if they don't include Dirk. They wont be looking for 2nd-tier "stars"


----------



## Tersk (Apr 9, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Lakota_Blazer</b>!
> 
> 
> It wont be with Dallas if they don't include Dirk. They wont be looking for 2nd-tier "stars"


Well then with who? please explain. you are not gonna get Marbury because Isiah is trying to make him the second coming of hiomself. You arent gonna get Tmac bcoz Kobe and Tmac wont co-exist. You might get Curry and some scrubs. I know Jamison if better than Curry


----------



## mavsman (Jun 11, 2003)

Just stop with the "No Dirk, No Shaq" B.S. The Mavericks are not
giving up Dirk for Shaq.

If the Lakers can do better than Walker, Jamison and Howard for
Shaq than good for them but they are not getting Dirk.

I love how the Laker fans think they are going to dictate everything.
If Shaq wants out bad enough they will have to get the best deal
they can get but it may not be everything that the Lakers would
ideally want.


----------



## LionOfJudah (May 27, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>mavsman</b>!
> Just stop with the "No Dirk, No Shaq" B.S. The Mavericks are not
> giving up Dirk for Shaq.
> 
> ...


Exactly, WTF are the Lakers going to do if they decide no Dirk no Shaq on these trade talks? They are going to get the finger from Cuban and they'll be stuck with a very unhappy Shaq who is demanding a trade. Its not like the Lakers really have much say in this. If he wants out they have to take the best deal they can get for him and you're not going to find any other team offering two "2nd-tier stars" for one fat ***. Anyone with out their head up their *** would know this. 

You can say Marbury and Thomas would be a good trade all you want but Thomas isn't worth his contract and never will be. Marbury is happy in NYC and likes being the Man in his hometown. I would throw that possiblity out the window. 

Now seeing as PHX has cap space they could possibly pick Shaq up but they'd have to give up too much talent to get an older player who will be damn near washed up by the time their front court hits their prime. The trade would have to inclue Matrix, Amare, and possibly a PG which I don't think PHX would be willing to part with seeing as they could possibly just land KMart for Amare since the Nets are stuck between a rock and a hard place similar to the Lakers' situation. 

Denver also has cap space and could possibly be in the mix but who do they send to LA that would be a better value than Walker and Jamison? Melo? Yeah, right....

Moving Shaq is going to be very difficult and I'm sure the Laker front office knows this so if they get an offer of two all-stars for one declining superstar don't think they won't take it.

Personally, I'd rather us try to land one of the top picks in the draft to get Howard. I'm sure Nelly is thinking the same thing since he loves to create mismatches with versatile big men. IE Dirk and remeber a few years back when he was trying to land Reshard Lewis.


----------



## Tersk (Apr 9, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>stevemc</b>!
> 
> 
> .
> ...


Recently i was looking at the posts of the Mavs board from about a year ago. There were all these ones on Rashard Lewis near certain to sign with Mavs. What happened?


----------



## LionOfJudah (May 27, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>theo4002</b>!
> 
> 
> Recently i was looking at the posts of the Mavs board from about a year ago. There were all these ones on Rashard Lewis near certain to sign with Mavs. What happened?


I think he started smoking crack and didn't want to come home to Dallas. :whoknows: 

Having Dirk and Lewis would of been hella sweet.


----------



## QRICH (Feb 2, 2004)

In todays Insider they said Dallas would *absolutely* give up Walker *AND* Dirk!


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

> In todays Insider they said Dallas would absolutely give up Walker AND Dirk!


I REALLY hope that was sarcasm, or at least you dont quite know what your talking about because...


> "I'd be hard-pressed to see us trading Dirk," Cuban said. "Dirk is as close to an untouchable as we'd get."


source: http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=1825829

While that doesn't necesarily mean that they definately won't trade him no matter what, its FAR from being that they would absolutely trade him.

But really... what the would Dirk do in LA but play 2nd fiddle to Kobe? The Lakers DO NOT need another superstar to come in and take some of the limelight off Kobe, they need 2nd and 3rd scoring options, not a superstar like Dirk. Look at what happens with Shaq and Kobe, and how two superstar ego's co-exist. Is that really what the Lakers need?


----------



## Tersk (Apr 9, 2004)

quote: 

"I'd be hard-pressed to see us trading Dirk," Cuban said. "Dirk is as close to an untouchable as we'd get." 


Hahahaha shutdown. That means if worst comes to worst then we'll think about it. Walker, Jamison and Finley for Shaq. 3 capable all-stars. 

PG: Payton/Fisher
SG: Kobe/Rush
SF: Finley/George
PF: Walker/Jamison
C: ???


I don't know if Antawn should be on the bench. Maybe keep him there for a year until Walkers contract runs out then sign a good center?


----------



## Tersk (Apr 9, 2004)

I found this on RealGM



> According to team and league sources, the Mavericks would part with any player with the exception of Dirk Nowitzki in order to bring back O'Neal or McGrady.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Am I hearing you guys correctly??????

You wouldnt trade Dirk and Nash/Walker for Shaq????

I admire your loyalty,but a little common sense is welcome....

Daniels
Finley
Shaq
Jamison
Howard

or

Nash
Daniels
Shaq
Jamison/Howard
Finley

That is a pretty good lineup


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

Theres no reason to. Dallas is a relatively young team, why would we send a guy like Dirk who still has a load of potential to get better for a guy like Shaq who has been lazy, unmotivated and slowly declining?


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

> Theres no reason to


i can think of 2 reasons

winning the west,winning the NBA finals

No Shaq,No chance


----------



## mavsman (Jun 11, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>truth</b>!
> 
> 
> i can think of 2 reasons
> ...


Maybe you should look at a calendar. Shaq will be 33 during
next season. You act like the Mavs should give the Lakers
anything they want just to get this fantastic franchise player who
will guarantee NBA championships.

If Shaq was 28-29 years old I would agree. Unfortunately he is
not and any team that sells the farm just to get him and pay him
160 million dollars over the next 7 years better get real lucky.
He has to stay healthy and motivated. Oh yeah and he is not
going to win the championship by himself. In fact he has had one
of the top 5 players in the NBA playing next to him the last two
years and they did not win any rings those two years.

So this idea that Shaq automatically guarantees a championship
is B.S. If this were such a great deal than there would be 28
teams all trying to give away all thier best players for Shaq. Name
how many teams are interested in a deal for Shaq with his 60 mil
contract over the next two years plus the 100 mil 5 year extension
he will require. You may be able to count the number of teams
on one finger. Maybe you could add a couple others but even
those are long shots. 

Don't get me wrong I am willing to give up alot to get him. But
if you think three of (Jamison/Walker/Nash/Howard/Finley) is
not enough than I would rather stand pat. Let the Lakers keep
a very unhappy Shaq and see how well that works out for them.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

face it...Unless you guys get a big man,or unless Shaq departs you will NEVER win in the West.

I am not saying your proposals arent fair,I just said all along two tweeners,Antoine squared,is not what LA needs or wants.

The Lakers have one player..Kobe..They need help at all positions.Nash,Dirk is a great fit for them,and thats what they will hod out for in a trade with the mavs...


----------



## tdizzle (Apr 12, 2003)

*Shaq, McGrady fuel trade talks (6-23-04)*



> Though Mitch Kupchak, the Lakers' general manager, recently suggested he wants to keep O'Neal, the club is entertaining possible trades.
> 
> The Mavericks are one of the more realistic landing spots for O'Neal, who will earn $27.7 million next season. According to an Eastern Conference executive, Dallas is offering Dirk Nowitzki and Steve Nash for O'Neal.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

*Lakers want Dirk if Mavs want Shaq (6-22-04)*


----------



## LionOfJudah (May 27, 2003)

So our SL would be

Shaq
Walker
Jamison
Howard
Daniels

Walker would be playing more point forward???? :sour:
It didn't work this year how the f' would it work next year?


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>truth</b>!
> 
> I just said all along two tweeners,Antoine squared,is not what LA needs or wants.



Right... so LA would rather have Devean George and Slava Medvadenko than Antawn Jamison and Antione Walker??? Thats ridiculous.


----------

