# SAR doesn't want to be a Net (Nets trade has been rescinded)



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

http://www.nypost.com/sports/nets/26727.htm



> The Nets have bigger problems than the condition of Shareef Abdur-Rahim's right knee. The team's handling of medical concerns growing from his physical have alienated the power forward to the point where he on longer wants join the team.
> 
> "Right now I don't feel I want to be a Net," Abdur-Rahim told The Post last night by telephone.



I am just bringing this up since the clippers were confident they would get SAR or Bonzi. I am not sure if the Clippers are still interested in him since they signed Rebraca but you never know.


----------



## leidout (Jul 13, 2005)

*Re: SAR doesn't want to be a Net*



Weasel said:


> I am just bringing this up since the clippers were confident they would get SAR or Bonzi. I am not sure if the Clippers are still interested in him since they signed Rebraca but you never know.


Rebraca and SAR play different positions? Rebraca is far too slow and athletic to play PF, and i don't think anyone in their right mind would say SAR would be capable of playing center.... even in a league with few true centers.

Even if (hopefully when) Jaric is resigned, the clippers could still offer SAR a decent contract, probably much more than the low deal the Nets were going to give him. It'd be a huge coup for the clippers if he signed, probably guaranteeing the a playoff spot (because there'd be no way we get that many ridiculous amount of injuries)... also his knee problems would probably allow the clips to create a very favorable contract.

But honestly... i doubt SAR would be happy on the clippers, he'd definitely be a backup, although i could see him still managing to find 25+ minutes a game. He's not gonna displace elton brand for sure and i highly doubt he can be more effective at SF than corey maggette.


----------



## NOBLE (Apr 10, 2005)

*Re: SAR doesn't want to be a Net*

Get him. NOW.


----------



## kamego (Dec 29, 2003)

*Re: SAR doesn't want to be a Net*

This makes for an interesting situtation. SAR is a free agent still then lol


----------



## KJay (Sep 22, 2002)

*Re: SAR doesn't want to be a Net*

might be


----------



## LAKobeBryant08 (Aug 7, 2005)

*Re: SAR doesn't want to be a Net*

If the Clippers can pick them up they will be solid

Shaun Livingston, Cuttino Mobley, SF???, Abdur-Rahim, Elton Brand.


That is a real nice team.


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

*Re: SAR doesn't want to be a Net*



LAKobeBryant08 said:


> If the Clippers can pick them up they will be solid
> 
> Shaun Livingston, Cuttino Mobley, SF???, Abdur-Rahim, Elton Brand.
> 
> ...


Corey Maggette anyone?


----------



## leidout (Jul 13, 2005)

*Re: SAR doesn't want to be a Net*



TucsonClip said:


> Corey Maggette anyone?


what'chu talkin' 'bout willis?


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

*Re: SAR doesn't want to be a Net*



leidout said:


> what'chu talkin' 'bout willis?


The Laker fan doesn't know who our SF is.


----------



## Mecca (Jul 3, 2005)

*Re: SAR doesn't want to be a Net*

I believe that the only way we can get this guy is to overpay him. He shot down a chance to be in the playoffs, to start & maybe the NBA finals with the Nets so why would come to here just to play backup to Brand & arguably the worst franchise in sports history....
















Just Kidding guys.... PULL THE TRIGGER DTS FOR SAR BABY.


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

*Re: SAR doesn't want to be a Net*



kamego said:


> This makes for an interesting situtation. SAR is a free agent still then lol


 SAR already signed a sign and trade, we have until the 12th to make a deal work, and the TE expires the 9th. His future is in the Nets hands, not his own for atleast until the 9th of August.

-Petey


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

*Re: SAR doesn't want to be a Net*

So the Nets will try and keep him now? Seeing that he publicly came out and said he doesn't want to be a Net, knowing that this will affect the team chemistry and how the fans will react to this news. Sure the Nets can still trade for him but they would be getting a disgruntled player who knew well what he was saying when he said he doesn't want to be a Net.


----------



## Miamiballer2k5 (Jun 29, 2005)

*Re: SAR doesn't want to be a Net*

Most teams have used there cap or MLE so what contender would he go to? hmmm 

H
E
A
T


----------



## leidout (Jul 13, 2005)

*Re: SAR doesn't want to be a Net*



Miamiballer2k5 said:


> Most teams have used there cap or MLE so what contender would he go to? hmmm


MLE? and who cares about the cap? Knicks or the Mavs for max dollars of course. Salary cap be damned.


----------



## qross1fan (Dec 28, 2004)

*Re: SAR doesn't want to be a Net*

why should we sign SAR . . instead of let's say Eddie Griffin?


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: SAR doesn't want to be a Net*

I wouldnt mind SAR on the team, although with Jaric, it would be a very clogged roster. At the very least, a signed SAR might mean no mikki, but you never know. If we get SAR, that also might mean the clipps would be more willing to leave Korolev in Russia. I cant see the clippers being LESS cautious about an injury though than another team, with them benig so money savvy, and with their injury history.


----------



## NOBLE (Apr 10, 2005)

*Re: SAR doesn't want to be a Net*

Eddie Griffin = TROUBLE.

'Nuff said.


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

*Re: SAR doesn't want to be a Net*

I don't know if the Clippers would still be interested since he did show in his physical that he had some knee problems.


----------



## leidout (Jul 13, 2005)

*Re: SAR doesn't want to be a Net*



Weasel said:


> I don't know if the Clippers would still be interested since he did show in his physical that he had some knee problems.


he'd be coming off the bench for the clippers, so it's probably not as big of an issue as it would be for other teams.


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: SAR doesn't want to be a Net*

But then its a paradox, because, if thats the case that he will be getting a LOT less playing time here, then he wouldnt want to come here, and were back where we started. 

I wouldnt take him for the previous contract offers he has been getting. But if this thing really does fall through, and another team doesnt pull a sign and trade, i think the clippers can get him straight up at a pretty low price, inasmuch as almost no team has cap room at this time, and some of the ones who have the exceptions available, are waiting to spend them on the finleys, christies, andersons, etc. who are being axed by the allen houston rule. 

Or the clippers can do a sign and trade if they want to bring back mikki, by giving them wilcox, and trying to get ha seung jin in return as well. (evil grin)


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

*Re: SAR doesn't want to be a Net*



NOBLE said:


> Eddie Griffin = TROUBLE.
> 
> 'Nuff said.


Why is he coming up? He's already resigned with the T-Wolves and isn't available.

As far as leaving Yarik overseas, that should absolutely be out of the question. I mean I can't see how anyone could see how this situation with Fran Vazquez has played out and then honestly advocate leaving him overseas.


----------



## qross1fan (Dec 28, 2004)

*Re: SAR doesn't want to be a Net*



arenas809 said:


> Why is he coming up? He's already resigned with the T-Wolves and isn't available.
> 
> As far as leaving Yarik overseas, that should absolutely be out of the question. I mean I can't see how anyone could see how this situation with Fran Vazquez has played out and then honestly advocate leaving him overseas.



got a link?


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

*Re: SAR doesn't want to be a Net*



qrich1fan said:


> got a link?


I'm going to assume you were referring to Griffin...

*"The Timberwolves have agreed to terms to bring back free agent Eddie Griffin. The forward, who averaged 7.5 points, 6.5 rebounds and 1.7 blocks in 70 games last season, will receive a two-year contract calling for $1.8 million the first year and $2 million the second year." *

http://www.startribune.com/stories/507/5544392-2.html


----------



## leidout (Jul 13, 2005)

*Re: SAR doesn't want to be a Net*

I will personally give SAR all $27 dollars in my wallet if he plays for the clippers.


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: SAR doesn't want to be a Net*

I wouldnt say leaving korolev is beyond the realm of reality. Remember, when the clippers thought they were getting sar or wells, they were almost 100% to leave him over there. But now even that they missed out (perhaps) on those guys, and with his strong workout, they are only at 50% to bring him over. So if the clippers DO get SAR, which im not saying is going to happen, it would seem very likely with that, coupled with dunleavvy telling jaric that he will get 33+ minutes a game, that they would lean toward leaving korolev over seas, as opposed to getting 0 playing time here. Not saying i agree with that decision, but with the information we have so far, that seems like what would happen. Is that in itself reason for me to not want SAR to come? Im not sure. Obviously sar can help us out a lot more now than korolev can, but upside is still so dang sexy


----------



## Showtime87 (Jun 27, 2005)

*Re: SAR doesn't want to be a Net*



Miamiballer2k5 said:


> Most teams have used there cap or MLE so what contender would he go to? hmmm
> 
> H
> E
> ...


Funny stuff, even fans of the Heat couldn't possibly be _that_ greedy. Where the hell would he play in Miami? Behind Walker and Haslem? Your GM just pulled off one of the most ingenious trades in recent memory and you guys still aren't satisfied!?!? LOL :laugh:   

And I thought us LA fans were the ones with the blase attitudes... :biggrin: 

But realistically, where would we put him if he were to consider signing with the Clipps? He's much too talented to play out of position or to simply back up Elton for a dozen minutes per night. As much game as he has and as great an addition he would be for team chemistry, he simply doesn't fit with this current Clippers roster.


----------



## mustang6944 (Aug 2, 2005)

*Re: SAR doesn't want to be a Net*

Though the whole thing revolves around SAR's knee, how can it be any worse than resigning Jaric? In fact, it may be a better move. SAR injured his knee in HS and has played with the scar tissued through college and 8 yrs of the NBA. The big issue is the fact that he is almost 30 and a multi year contract with the bum knee that may start having problems. I do not understand the Nets issues. They traded for Carter who had injuries issues and more recent.


----------



## qross1fan (Dec 28, 2004)

*Re: SAR doesn't want to be a Net*

the deal will go through Nets will take him even with a failed physical

http://realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/36927/20050808/shareef_will_be_in_jersey/


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

*Re: SAR doesn't want to be a Net*

Well the Nets have until 9 pm pacific to get the deal done. If they don't can't do anything before that there TE expires. Should be interesting if the deal falls through.


----------



## loi888 (Dec 28, 2004)

*Re: SAR doesn't want to be a Net*

I'm not too eager to get SAR. He has already shown in the past that he is injury prone. He's knee is not going to last. If the Clippers want to stay out of injury prone players, this is one of them.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

*Re: SAR doesn't want to be a Net*



loi888 said:


> I'm not too eager to get SAR. He has already shown in the past that he is injury prone. He's knee is not going to last. If the Clippers want to stay out of injury prone players, this is one of them.


Ya a guy who has played in 75+ games in 7 out of the 9 years he's been in the league should be classified as injury prone.


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

*Re: SAR doesn't want to be a Net*

SAR will not be a Net!
http://www.nba.com/nets/news/shareef_rescind.html


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

*Re: SAR doesn't want to be a Net*

You guys think the Clippers will pursue him again? If anything happens it would probably end with Wilcox being traded for him to clear up cap room.


----------



## leidout (Jul 13, 2005)

*Re: SAR doesn't want to be a Net*



Weasel said:


> You guys think the Clippers will pursue him again? If anything happens it would probably end with Wilcox being traded for him to clear up cap room.


Wow, the clippers with a solid starting line up and a killer bench? it's looking very possible.


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: SAR doesn't want to be a Net*

They can probably get him for a bargain. But at the very least, i wouldnt mind offering wilcox to the nets now, perhaps for our number 1 pick back.


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

*Re: SAR doesn't want to be a Net*

I think if the Clippers still want him they should offer him a nice, big 2 year contract in a sign and trade for Wilcox + filler. They shouldn't offer him more than 2-3 years because the Clippers will need the money for Kaman and Livingston. I think SAR would take a 2 year contract if the price is high.


----------



## Unique (Apr 13, 2005)

*Re: SAR doesn't want to be a Net*



Weasel said:


> I think if the Clippers still want him they should offer him a nice, big 2 year contract in a sign and trade for Wilcox + filler. They shouldn't offer him more than 2-3 years because the Clippers will need the money for Kaman and Livingston. I think SAR would take a 2 year contract if the price is high.


he has said that he wants to go to a contendor (no offence)


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

Come on, he was set to get a 6 year deal, and he's gona settle for 2 years from the Clips?

Let's be real for a minute, seriously.

We'd be lucky for him to even answer our phone calls, you don't get him on the phone and offer 2 years.

I'm still against trading Wilcox, if all Portland wanted was a 1st round pick, why the hell would you throw in Wilcox?


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

You may think that if you want arenas. When he was talking with the Clippers the only thing I heard was 2-3 year deals. That could have been the reason why he didn't come here but the Clippers shouldn't give him a 5 year deal. I was saying that if the Clippers wanted him signing him, they should go big for 2-3 years which would be smart.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

Weasel said:


> You may think that if you want arenas. When he was talking with the Clippers the only thing I heard was 2-3 year deals. That could have been the reason why he didn't come here but the Clippers shouldn't give him a 5 year deal. I was saying that if the Clippers wanted him signing him, they should go big for 2-3 years which would be smart.


Like I said before, he was set to get a 6 year deal, he's not gona accept 2 or 3 from a team like us, if you're going to go after him, you're going to have to come with a stronger offer than that, otherwise we'll just remember being listed as one of the teams that was interested and nothing more.


----------



## Sánchez AF (Aug 10, 2003)

arenas809 said:


> Like I said before, he was set to get a 6 year deal, he's not gona accept 2 or 3 from a team like us, if you're going to go after him, you're going to have to come with a stronger offer than that, otherwise we'll just remember being listed as one of the teams that was interested and nothing more.



I think thats true But Other than the Nets who would offer a 5-6 Year deal ?


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

Were forgetting some important points here.

1. A team who desperately needs someone like SAR, and who is not going to find anything even remotely closee to his abilities anywhere else, thought that his problem is so serious, that its enough to give up on a bargain. That means this problem is pretty legit for most cautious teams, and teams will think long and hard before signing him. Even SAR says that if the deal didnt go though hes going to have a heck of a time with damage control. if he fails a physical where they werent necessarily looking specifically for any one thing, how is he going to pass another physical, when any team giving him one will be now looking at the exact reason that the trade fell through? Not to say that a team will not take him, even if he fails, but its something to think about. 

2. Barring a trade, and even WITH a trade, not many "contenders" have ANY cap space left, not even full MLE. Clippers if im not mistaken are the best team that has cap space out there. The teams that have their MLE's are not going to be pursuing him right now neither, because many of the better ones, are waiting for the finleys, chritsties, etc. to be cut by the allen houston rule to make a run at them. 

3. Clippers were confident they could get SAR before, they lost out in the end. That means he did show some interest in them, and must have told them they were in the game. But of course, with the sign and trade, he was able to get a 6th year on his contract, play on a team that DESPERATELY needed him, on a team that he could start, in a conference where front court players are weaker, on a team with 2 superstars, and one up and coming star. Of course he picks the nets. 

4. Clippers might not be interested. At the time they were making a run at bonzi and SAR, all indications were that they wanted to leave korolev over seas. But with his strong play of late in practices and at the tournament, they have been said to come completely around in that decision. If they get SAR now, they would be put in a tough situation. If they bring korolev over, he would get little to no playing time. Also, clippers are not exactly ones to get injury prone players, with their history. Id say they would even be more cautious than the nets.

Anyway, I dont see SAR getting many offers at all of any kind of money this late in the game, and after this debacle. Stranger things have happened, Atlanta might throw big money at him if the JJ deal falls through, just to try to inch closer to the minimum salary this year, and they do need front court help, but that would mean SAR is going to the worst team in the nba last year.


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

There are some rumors that SAR will sign with the Kings. This would be bad news for the Clippers as the Kings would get stronger. If SAR were to go anywhere I would hope to see him go to the East. Him possibly going to the Kings is not good.


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

im curious how they can afford to sign him. Before the free agency began they were like 12 million over the cap. They lost mobley but got a more expensive contract in wells. They added the contract of jason hart, and ronnie price, jamal sampson, signed garcia their draft pick, i know ive got to be missing something, but would they be able to sign him outright if theyre over their cap? If they were over the cap, these small signings (other than garcia), wouldnt they be chipping away from their exception, meaning that if they even have anything left, they could only offer like 3-4 million for SAR?


----------



## DaFranchise (Jun 29, 2005)

We Dont Have Enough Minutes For Sar And He Is Not Gonna Take A 2 Year Deal. He Wants A Long Term Deal Cuz He Knows His Knee Is About To Fall Off


----------



## Jermaniac Fan (Jul 27, 2003)

http://www.hoopsworld.com/article_13751.shtml


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

Looks like he might end up as a King. Which I would predict would make the Kings strong again barring any injuries. The whole situation of the Nets and SAR might end up screwing the Clippers and some other western conference teams.


----------



## Unique (Apr 13, 2005)

kings will have a strong front court ...but u guys have a better backcourt


----------



## DaFranchise (Jun 29, 2005)

I Like Our Frontcourt Better Than Sac Too. Kaman Schooled Brad Miller In Every Game Last Year And Brand Is Way Better Than Any Pf On Sac Including Sar. Clips Are Just A Better Team Than Sac. Not Too Worried About Them


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

It is official the Kings sign SAR.


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

Rumor has it he signed for 1 year.


----------

