# Shareef : "I don't want to be a Net"



## QRICH (Feb 2, 2004)

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



> "I don't want to be there," continued Abdur-Rahim. "We can just part ways and I'll find another situation where I'll have to do some damage control."
> 
> Abdur-Rahim doesn't have the power to stop the deal, but as Goodwin pointed out, "If you were the Nets, why would you bring in a player who no longer wants to be there?"


This certainly puts an interesting twist to things.


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

The trade is not offical so he could sign with another team right .


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

This sucks for the Nets Oh well


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

s&t sar for gooden!


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

The Cavs and Sac town would be great fits for Shareef


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

I guess he didn't like how the Nets handle the medical situation.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

i hope nash can work another s&t with sactown or the cavs 

sar for drew gooden? someone email nash


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

Nothing is ever easy with Shareef or his agent! I know this is not their fault, but this is not the most professional way to handle it. It is again, premature!


----------



## gatorpops (Dec 17, 2004)

Could this be Thorn trying to get theTE back so he can use it to sign McInnis? 

We do not know what kind of give and take he and John Nash had throughout these negotiations. Maybe Thorn is pressurng Nash to give back the TE and insure keeping the draft pick.

Just maybe it is possible. 

This has been a very tense negoations for this deal all the way through. With SAR and his agent pressuring the Nets to just go ahead and complete the deal it looks to me this could be the case or some such haggeling.

gatorpops


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

if this is true, and Shareef ends up not playing for the Nets, that's Karma kicking the Nets squarely in the nardinos.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

hap i sense a csmn question forming in your mind! 


you could email sar agent or nash about a s&t for say drew gooden?


----------



## ebott (Jan 7, 2003)

Hap said:


> if this is true, and Shareef ends up not playing for the Nets, that's Karma kicking the Nets squarely in the nardinos.


Damn straight. I thought it was nifty that we got a first rounder out of the Nets. It would be even nifty if the deal fell through and S.A-R. ended up with a respectible team like Sacramento.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

Utherhimo said:


> hap i sense a csmn question forming in your mind!
> 
> 
> you could email sar agent or nash about a s&t for say drew gooden?


I shant be near a computer to email the show tomorrow.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

so email the show today 

what do u think of a s&t for gooden?

sar is too much of a nice to be a net thorn as proven that he is shady at best, i hope this keeps fa away in the future. I never liked the nets, now I really dont like them between vc and thorn i have grown to dislike them. I think they will flip if they dont get sar, they are 2 injuries away from being bad team. karma will be felt


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

Nets never wanted to pay SAR what he's worth and they have hemmed and hawed all through the negotiations. He's right to bail from these losers before they have him by the stones.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

Utherhimo said:


> so email the show today


while it takes me a while to catch onto hints, I caught a hint. A hint about me, emails and people associated with the Blazers.


> what do u think of a s&t for gooden?


if he's only for 1 year, and we get a pick from them, that's not bad.



> sar is too much of a nice to be a net thorn as proven that he is shady at best, i hope this keeps fa away in the future. I never liked the nets, now I really dont like them between vc and thorn i have grown to dislike them. I think they will flip if they dont get sar, they are 2 injuries away from being bad team. karma will be felt


----------



## dkap (May 13, 2003)

> He's right to bail from these losers before they have him by the stones.


As bad as the Nets' franchise history has been, they're not nearly the losers Shareef is. Not even close.

How long till the guy (and his agent) gets labeled a cancer?

Dan


----------



## Peaceman (Jan 15, 2003)

dkap said:


> As bad as the Nets' franchise history has been, they're not nearly the losers Shareef is. Not even close.
> 
> How long till the guy (and his agent) gets labeled a cancer?
> 
> Dan


I totally disagree with you. He has been on bad teams, which doesn't make you a loser. The only bad mark on his behavior was last summer when his agent and himself tried to force a trade, but he still came in and played. I totally agree with SAR on this situation. The Nets have broadcasted his knee problem to the whole world. They could have told the press there was a delay on getting medical information from his physical. Would the press have tried to look deeper, yes, but at least the Nets wouldn't have broadcasted it to the whole world.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

no harm ment i email them too, berrett saying ahh another email Hap makes me smile.


the gooden s&t wasnt my idea but its better than my rubin for rasho trade so i had to support the idea of getting gooden, helping the cavs keep lebron instead of him bolting to the lakers.


----------



## dkap (May 13, 2003)

> I totally disagree with you. He has been on bad teams, which doesn't make you a loser.


Whether or not his teammates were to blame, Shareef has lost everywhere he's been, which makes him a loser on the court, like it or not. Biggest loser in the league, in fact.

Management considered his Atlanta squad to be a lock for the playoffs, and they still managed to lose big... He came to a Portland team that didn't even know it was possible to miss the playoffs, and what'd they do? They lost. If Shareef wants to be remembered for something other than being the biggest loser in NBA history, it's up to him to turn things around.



> The only bad mark on his behavior was last summer when his agent and himself tried to force a trade, but he still came in and played.


He and Zach didn't exactly get along, but we don't really know who was to blame for that. Ditto for Shareef and Darius. Of course, Zach and Darius aren't the most mature of guys, so it's logical to guess that Shareef wasn't the primary problem. But even his #1 fan Play said that Shareef was sleepwalking through much of the season, which seems like a pretty major bad mark on his behavior to me, especially from someone notorious for not finding a way to help his team win. And what of the questionable timing of the elbow injury? And this whole signing/posturing with NJ situation is way too similar to what we went through with him last year.

Just because a guy sounds good in interviews and says all the right things, doesn't make him a good teammate. We should all know that by now after having DA around.

Dan


----------



## BIG Q (Jul 8, 2005)

I would love to see SAR hook up with an East coast team that could haunt the Nets and Thorn for this. It is a very big deal for SAR to be quoted in print saying he no longer wants to be a Net. 

This would indicate that Thorn has alianated SAR by not giving him any reassurances and by being smug with the press again, just as he was when he declared he would never give up a FRDP for SAR.

This is Thorns fault. He should have never scheduled a press conference. He KNEW that SAR had a knee injury in HS just like all teams know. He and Nets doctors had access to these records a month ago, after all they are SAR's property and he can show them to whomever he wishes. 

But for Thorn to publicly state they are investigating plan B backed SAR into a corner. I would look for him to sign a one year deal and work free agency again next year.


----------



## Peaceman (Jan 15, 2003)

dkap said:


> Management considered his Atlanta squad to be a lock for the playoffs, and they still managed to lose big... He came to a Portland team that didn't even know it was possible to miss the playoffs, and what'd they do? They lost. If Shareef wants to be remembered for something other than being the biggest loser in NBA history, it's up to him to turn things around.
> 
> 
> He and Zach didn't exactly get along, but we don't really know who was to blame for that. Ditto for Shareef and Darius. Of course, Zach and Darius aren't the most mature of guys, so it's logical to guess that Shareef wasn't the primary problem. But even his #1 fan Play said that Shareef was sleepwalking through much of the season, which seems like a pretty major bad mark on his behavior to me, especially from someone notorious for not finding a way to help his team win. And what of the questionable timing of the elbow injury? And this whole signing/posturing with NJ situation is way too similar to what we went through with him last year.
> ...


I don't agree that Atlanta was a lock for the playoffs. They are the second worse ran team in the NBA for a reason. I don't think SAR should be blamed for that. SAR and Theo is enough to lead them to the Hawks to the playoffs? They didn't lead Portland this year either. I can't remember a Hawk team in the last 8 years that was a lock for the playoffs. 

As for the timing on the elbow injury, why would he do that? He made it clear he wanted to be traded. Faking a injury to ruin your trade value when you would rather leave doesn't make sense. 

The guy lost weight in the off season to play small forward, even while he demanded a trade. Sounds fairly professional to me. When Ruben, NVE and DA went south at the end of the season with the youth movement, SAR stayed with the young guys and kept his trap shut. Maybe he was ticked, angry, whatever, but I still don't get him being a loser.


----------



## njnets21 (May 29, 2005)

cimalee said:


> The trade is not offical so he could sign with another team right .


No he cannot. He already signed a contract with the Nets, but it was contingent on passing the physical. So it is up to Thorn now to accept the contract. If Thorn says "ok, we'll take him", then SAR is a Net regardless because he did sign the contract already last week. 

And as for someone saying Thorn just wants to get his pick back, that is not true because, as I said earlier, the trade and contract is already signed, so the trade cannot be changed at all.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

I think we ought to resign Shareef to a 3 year deal right here for $5 mil per year

ok Dan?


----------



## dkap (May 13, 2003)

> I don't agree that Atlanta was a lock for the playoffs.


I didn't say I thought they were a lock, just that management did. They went as far as to promise it to season ticket holders.



> I don't think SAR should be blamed for that. SAR and Theo is enough to lead them to the Hawks to the playoffs? They didn't lead Portland this year either. I can't remember a Hawk team in the last 8 years that was a lock for the playoffs.


They also had Jason Terry and Big Dog Robinson; can't recall who their SG was at the time.



> As for the timing on the elbow injury, why would he do that? He made it clear he wanted to be traded. Faking a injury to ruin your trade value when you would rather leave doesn't make sense.


Little about Shareef makes sense... How does demanding to be traded help your trade value? How does not fitting in on the first playoff team you join help it? The timing of the injury was just ridiculously suspect.



> The guy lost weight in the off season to play small forward, even while he demanded a trade. Sounds fairly professional to me.


Is it because he wanted to do what was best for the team or because he knew it was the only way to get minutes and showcase himself for a trade?



> When Ruben, NVE and DA went south at the end of the season with the youth movement, SAR stayed with the young guys and kept his trap shut. Maybe he was ticked, angry, whatever, but I still don't get him being a loser.


I think you're caught up with "loser" being a character description. I'm talking purely on the court, and he's done absolutely nothing to dispell that notion throughout his NBA career. Zip. Zilch. Notta.

Besides, he was actually getting minutes at that point with Zach out. Ruben, NVE, and DA were all apparently asked to sit it out the rest of the way to make room for the young guys, so the comparison isn't a great fit.



> I think we ought to resign Shareef to a 3 year deal right here for $5 mil per year ok Dan?


Yeah, that would make my year...

Dan


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

dkap said:


> As bad as the Nets' franchise history has been, they're not nearly the losers Shareef is. Not even close.
> 
> How long till the guy (and his agent) gets labeled a cancer?
> 
> Dan


What a joke! 



I'm glad SAR finally spoke his mind and let the Nets know that they've handled this whole trade situation wrong. SAR would make them a contender in the East, and the Nets need to show SAR the respect he deserves and give up what he's worth, instead of trying to low ball him and the Trail Blazers. If I was a Net fan, I'd be pissed off at their management, because now there isnt squat left at the PF position for them to sign. :laugh:

Nash knows that the whole "failed physical" was a bunch of bs, and that it was Thorns way of trying to get the Trail Blazers to give back the 1st round pick, and still get SAR, because Thorn wasnt too happy about being forced to give up the 1st to Nash. Looks like Thorn's plan may have back fired. :clap:


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

njnets21 said:


> No he cannot. He already signed a contract with the Nets, but it was contingent on passing the physical. So it is up to Thorn now to accept the contract. If Thorn says "ok, we'll take him", then SAR is a Net regardless because he did sign the contract already last week.
> 
> And as for someone saying Thorn just wants to get his pick back, that is not true because, as I said earlier, the trade and contract is already signed, so the trade cannot be changed at all.


NOT TRUE! It was a sign and trade, SAR would have signed a contract with Portland (NOT NJ) then traded to the Nets.

Yes, the trade can be changed. If SAR doesnt pass the physical according to the Nets, then they can void the deal. Portland and NJ could then try to work out another trade, but that wont happen, because Nash wont budge on his demands, he'd just let SAR go.


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

I would take Gooden , I would rather have him than the Nets 1st rounder


----------



## dkap (May 13, 2003)

> SAR would make them a contender in the East, and the Nets need to show SAR the respect he deserves and give up what he's worth


I'm not convinced he's a great fit for the Nets. Their strength is run and gun, not half court. The playing styles of Kidd, Carter, and Jefferson will be at odds with those of Shareef. The question is, will beefing up a weak area of the game outweigh the countering of their strengths?

Considering how short of a window NJ probably has with age and health (all 4 key guys, counting Shareef, coming off fairly major injuries), the above concern combined with it being a 6 year is plenty reason to pause and think if you're Nets management.

Dan


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

dkap said:


> I'm not convinced he's a great fit for the Nets. Their strength is run and gun, not half court. The playing styles of Kidd, Carter, and Jefferson will be at odds with those of Shareef. The question is, will beefing up a weak area of the game outweigh the countering of their strengths?
> 
> Considering how short of a window NJ probably has with age and health (all 4 key guys, counting Shareef, coming off fairly major injuries), the above concern combined with it being a 6 year is plenty reason to pause and think if you're Nets management.
> 
> Dan


Not EVERY player in the lineup needs to be a "run & gun" type player for it to work. J.Jackson was effective for the Suns and R.Evans/D.Fortsen/J.James were effective for the Sonics, none of them are runners. I think SAR would be more effective in that style than you think.


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

Or how about a sign and trade for Luke Jackson I hear hes on the block .


----------



## Blazer4ever (Feb 1, 2003)

Why can't shareef and zach co-exist? if you trade Darius?


----------



## Bookworm (Feb 23, 2005)

Blazer4ever said:


> Why can't shareef and zach co-exist? if you trade Darius?


 They both play about the same game..They need the ball about
15 feet from the basket and last yr teams all saged off of them.
For some reason they don't compliment each other. SAR also has
a hard time guarding SFs and zak is avg at best defending his spot.
Also who ever you bring in for Darius would also expect some time


----------



## dkap (May 13, 2003)

> Not EVERY player in the lineup needs to be a "run & gun" type player for it to work... I think SAR would be more effective in that style than you think.


That's why I said:

"The question is, will beefing up a weak area of the game outweigh the countering of their strengths?"

Could go either way. No way of knowing until they're put together out on the floor, which is a big gamble if you're unsure about the long-term health.

Dan


----------



## Peaceman (Jan 15, 2003)

I think we should resign SAR or at least offer the midlevel exception to him on a 4 year deal. If playing time or Zach and himself don't work out, we could always trade him. The midlevel exception is a bargain or someone with his talent.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

Peaceman said:


> I think we should resign SAR or at least offer the midlevel exception to him on a 4 year deal. If playing time or Zach and himself don't work out, we could always trade him. The midlevel exception is a bargain or someone with his talent.


Cant, we have given a good chunk of our MLE to Dixon and C.Smith.


----------



## hirschmanz (Jun 3, 2005)

The worst part about it is, the blazers increase their bad rap around the league because SAR didn't pass a physical contingent to a sign and trade.

Unfortunate, SAR will be labeled a cancer, along with any other blazer who has any small problem.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

hirschmanz said:


> The worst part about it is, the blazers increase their bad rap around the league because SAR didn't pass a physical contingent to a sign and trade.
> 
> Unfortunate, SAR will be labeled a cancer, along with any other blazer who has any small problem.


What?!?!?!? Sorry, but that's funny, and makes no sense!


----------



## Public Defender (May 5, 2003)

BEER&BASKETBALL said:


> What?!?!?!? Sorry, but that's funny, and makes no sense!


Yeah, I don't quite follow that one either. At the same time, I'm not sure I agree with your earlier point that Thorn is trying to get out of the trade with the physical. #1 - it'd be extremely disturbing to the league if it was proven that the Nets used a trumped-up doctor's exam to void a trade that the league had approved (the word "fraud" springs to mind), and #2 - why would Thorn like the trade a week ago, and then suddenly not like it anymore? It doesn't make sense, and as others have pointed out, in the meantime, the Nets have lost other possible players to bring in at the PF spot. 

Personally, I think the Nets are more incompetent than they are devious, and I think it's the incompetence that Goodwin and Abdur-Rahim are objecting to. They need to get their act together and do everything they can to assuage the concerns of Abdur-Rahim and his agent. They need to come in and say "Reef, we know you're ok - we want you on the floor with Kidd, Jefferson and Vince. We're going to be something special." And they have to believe it - which they should, because Reef gives them the reliable inside scorer and rebounder they need!


----------



## CanJohno (Feb 11, 2005)

hirschmanz said:


> *The worst part about it is, the blazers increase their bad rap around the league because SAR didn't pass a physical contingent to a sign and trade.*
> 
> Unfortunate, SAR will be labeled a cancer, along with any other blazer who has any small problem.


 :rotf:


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Re: Resigning Shareef



BEER&BASKETBALL said:


> Cant, we have given a good chunk of our MLE to Dixon and C.Smith.



Actually we can... but not with the MLE

He is a Bird righted veteran, whose rights technically belong to us since we have not renounced him, and until the NJ trade is officially finalized. If NJ rejects the trade we still own the Bird rights to him. Since we own his Bird rights, if he wants to stay with us, we can resign him even though we are over the cap. But I am sure another team will want him at that price who can offer him a chance at starters minutes.

We still own the Bird rights to him since he has not been renounced by us, or another team has not finally received him in a trade. Almost... but not yet. It works both ways.


----------



## ebott (Jan 7, 2003)

BEER&BASKETBALL said:


> Cant, we have given a good chunk of our MLE to Dixon and C.Smith.


I think he ment to offer him MLE type money. We've still got his bird rights so we can offer him what ever we feel like.


----------



## Storyteller (Dec 31, 2002)

IF Abdur-Rahim does not get traded to NJ

IF he's serious about wanting to play somewhere other than NJ

IF he can get insurance on a contract (perhaps a big IF)

then I'd rather see this:


Portland trades Abdur-Rahim (S&T) to Sacramento and Detroit's 1st round pick in 2006 to Atlanta

Sacramento trades Kenny Thomas and their 1st round pick in 2006 to Atlanta

Atlanta trades their 2006 1st round pick to Portland.


----------



## el_Diablo (May 15, 2003)

Storyteller said:


> IF Abdur-Rahim does not get traded to NJ
> 
> IF he's serious about wanting to play somewhere other than NJ
> 
> ...


why would atlanta do this? 2 late first rounders and kenny thomas for their pick, which will certainly be a lottery pick and probably top 5. unless they have illusions of being competitive next season.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

i would rather have sar for gooden


----------



## stockfire (Jul 17, 2004)

Peaceman said:


> I think we should resign SAR or at least offer the midlevel exception to him on a 4 year deal. If playing time or Zach and himself don't work out, we could always trade him. The midlevel exception is a bargain or someone with his talent.


1) Shareef doesn't want to be in Portland, that much is well known. So why sign for a the MLE here when he could sign for the MLE elsewhere (or more)

2) We CAN'T trade him, as proved by last season. I sure wouldn't place any bets on moving him halfway through the season

3) It looks like the Nets deal is finally going through, so, it's all over anyway.


----------

