# Shaq "IF I go to Dallas, Dirk must stay in Dallas"



## LB26matrixns

ROFL

http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/sports/basketball/9010236.htm

Why don't Laker fans believe me when I tell them that Shaq isn't going to let himself be traded to a team for all that teams talent. He's gonna make sure the Lakers get screwed, bad.

"*Meanwhile, reports were circulating on LA radio that Shaq was demanding Dirk be in Dallas if he's going to be traded to the Mavs.*"

LOL. So Laker fans are thinking...."that's fine, we'll just trade him to Jersey (example)." LOL and Shaq's first words will be to call New Jersey and tell them "listen, you trade for me, and I'll opt out after next season."

Jersey of course hangs up.....why would they want to give anything of value for a player who is telling them he'll leave them high and dry after next season. 

LA's choice inevitably becomes to trade Shaq to a team he wants to go to, but to *leave the players he wants to play with on that team*, because he'll quickly get the word out to every other team, and in every trade he doesn't want to be in, that he's a goner if they trade for him, OR to keep a disgruntled Shaq in LA. And we all have seen what a financial crisis that would put the Lakers in for the rest of Shaq's career. It would literally be Shaq, Kobe and nobody.


----------



## The MAgiC

And I thought T-Mac had _us_ by the nuts. Shaq is worse.


----------



## Tersk

Shaqs the MAN!!!

Ahh That will be fantastic if he comes to Dallas if Dirk is still there. Steve Nash
Michael Finley
Antoine Walker
for
Shaq
Rick Fox


C: Shaquille O'Neal
PF: Dirk Nowitzki
SF: Josh Howard
SG: Marquis Daniels
PG: Devin Harris

Bench:
Jerry Stackhouse, Christian Laettner, Rick Fox


----------



## LB26matrixns

> Originally posted by <b>theo4002</b>!
> Shaqs the MAN!!!
> 
> Ahh That will be fantastic if he comes to Dallas if Dirk is still there. Steve Nash
> Michael Finley
> Antoine Walker
> for
> Shaq
> Rick Fox
> 
> 
> C: Shaquille O'Neal
> PF: Dirk Nowitzki
> SF: Josh Howard
> SG: Marquis Daniels
> PG: Devin Harris
> 
> Bench:
> Jerry Stackhouse, Christian Laettner, Rick Fox


And Karl Malone, who didn't sign with LA for Laker fans or to play with Kobe.....would probably take your MLE and be ready to play by about February.


----------



## JT

*sort of like nevus with lebron.*

Ah man I'm starting to fall in love with Shaq...watching him screw up the Lakers, its like poetry in motion.


----------



## Vermillion

Shaq's dreaming so badly it isn't even funny.

Maybe Stackhouse/Walker/Nash for Shaq?


----------



## Tooeasy

> Originally posted by <b>theo4002</b>!
> Shaqs the MAN!!!
> 
> Ahh That will be fantastic if he comes to Dallas if Dirk is still there. Steve Nash
> Michael Finley
> Antoine Walker
> for
> Shaq
> Rick Fox
> 
> 
> C: Shaquille O'Neal
> PF: Dirk Nowitzki
> SF: Josh Howard
> SG: Marquis Daniels
> PG: Devin Harris
> 
> Bench:
> Jerry Stackhouse, Christian Laettner, Rick Fox


pretty crappy mavericks fan if you'd be pleased to see michael finley go :\


----------



## Pan Mengtu

"If I go to Dallas, it must be in exchange for a future 2nd round draft pick and 20 bucks"


----------



## Ron Mexico

Is there a a "no trade clause" for Shaq? If there is not the Lakers can trade Shaq to Dallas for Dirk and someone else, if Shaq gets mad then it Mark Cuban's problem

but Mitch Kupchack has no balls so I doubt it will happen


----------



## Crossword

> Originally posted by <b>b-diddy</b>!
> 
> pretty crappy mavericks fan if you'd be pleased to see michael finley go :\


Shaq >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Finley


----------



## Hollis

> Originally posted by <b>b-diddy</b>!
> 
> pretty crappy mavericks fan if you'd be pleased to see michael finley go :\


I like Finley a lot too...but when you've got 2 young guys like Howard and Daniels you can definitely afford to let him go...


----------



## Amareca

> Originally posted by <b>sboydell</b>!
> Is there a a "no trade clause" for Shaq? If there is not the Lakers can trade Shaq to Dallas for Dirk and someone else, if Shaq gets mad then it Mark Cuban's problem
> 
> but Mitch Kupchack has no balls so I doubt it will happen


Cuban wouldn't do it. Maybe if Shaq was 25 but Shaq is old and has made his money.
He might just sit out the season if he doesn't like what is going on.

I also heard that Shaq has a "no-trade" clause as well.


----------



## futuristxen

Shaq is great. I love what he is doing right now.


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt

Shaq does not have a no trade clause.

He has to go wherever the Lakers would trade him to, and if he refuses then his contract would be terminated and he would lose 30 million a year. I guess we would see whether or not it really is about money.


----------



## Pinball

> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> Shaq is great. I love what he is doing right now.


I'm sure you do. He wants to play hardball, **** so will we. He's going to spend the next two years of his contract rotting on the bench if he doesn't change his tune. I just hope Mitch the ***** has the balls to stand up to him.


----------



## jokeaward

> Originally posted by <b>Pinball</b>!
> 
> 
> I'm sure you do. He wants to play hardball, **** so will we. He's going to spend the next two years of his contract rotting on the bench if he doesn't change his tune. I just hope Mitch the ***** has the balls to stand up to him.


Man that would be salary cap hell for the Lakers. That's like Grant Hill and Allan Houston combined.


----------



## Jamel Irief

> Originally posted by <b>LB26matrixns</b>!
> ROFL
> 
> http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/sports/basketball/9010236.htm
> 
> Why don't Laker fans believe me when I tell them that Shaq isn't going to let himself be traded to a team for all that teams talent. He's gonna make sure the Lakers get screwed, bad.


LOL! ROFL! LMAO! Because Shaq has no choice in where he is traded. Are you going to mock Laker fans if Shaq demands to be traded to Mercury for Diana Taurasai?



> LOL. So Laker fans are thinking...."that's fine, we'll just trade him to Jersey (example)." LOL and Shaq's first words will be to call New Jersey and tell them "listen, you trade for me, and I'll opt out after next season."


Then the Lakers don't trade Shaq to anywhere. He can retire if he doesn't want to play here. Which leaves...



> LA's choice inevitably becomes to trade Shaq to a team he wants to go to, but to *leave the players he wants to play with on that team*, because he'll quickly get the word out to every other team, and in every trade he doesn't want to be in, that he's a goner if they trade for him, OR to keep a disgruntled Shaq in LA. And we all have seen what a financial crisis that would put the Lakers in for the rest of Shaq's career. It would literally be Shaq, Kobe and nobody.


Not really. You seem to think cap room is the only way to acquire assets in this league. The Bulls had cap room 3 offseasons in a row and ended up with Ron Mercer, Brent Barry and Brad Miller. And now those 3 players and a lottery pick got them Jerome Williams and Antonio Davis, ROFL, LMAO and LOL all in one.


----------



## Pinball

> Originally posted by <b>jokeaward</b>!
> 
> 
> Man that would be salary cap hell for the Lakers. That's like Grant Hill and Allan Houston combined.


True but he's only here for 2 years. There is an end in sight and we'll have $30 mill of cap room when he leaves. I want to deal Shaq only if the Lakers get something reasonable in return. A bunch of old, expensive, selfish, one-dimensional players is not equal return for a top 3 player. Dirk, a top 10 player, is more along the lines of what I want. I don't see how Dallas fans think this is a rip off. They haven't won **** with Dirk in the 4-5 years he has been there. Shaq has won 3 titles in LA and has been to 4. If Dallas adds him without giving up too much of their core (sans Dirk), they'll be no worse than the second best team in the West. Dirk, as good as he is, isn't going to take that team to the next level. Shaq can and probably will. Hell, I'd love to hang on to him if he actually wanted to stay. Unfortunately, he and Kobe are acting like babies so I'm going to side with the younger baby on this one.


----------



## LB26matrixns

> Originally posted by <b>sboydell</b>!
> Is there a a "no trade clause" for Shaq? If there is not the Lakers can trade Shaq to Dallas for Dirk and someone else, if Shaq gets mad then it Mark Cuban's problem
> 
> but Mitch Kupchack has no balls so I doubt it will happen


But why does Dallas do that? They just say no thanks, because no other trade will get done. Shaq will keep any other trade from getting done. 

Some people need an entire two-semester college course on "leverage"


----------



## Kyle

This makes me believe that Shaq isn't going anywhere.


----------



## LB26matrixns

> Originally posted by <b>Wilt_The_Stilt</b>!
> Shaq does not have a no trade clause.
> 
> He has to go wherever the Lakers would trade him to, and if he refuses then his contract would be terminated and he would lose 30 million a year. I guess we would see whether or not it really is about money.


And Shaq would let "wherever the Lakers would trade him to" that he'll walk the first chance he gets if "wherever the Lakers would trade him to" trades for him.


----------



## LB26matrixns

> Originally posted by <b>Pinball</b>!
> 
> 
> I'm sure you do. He wants to play hardball, **** so will we. He's going to spend the next two years of his contract rotting on the bench if he doesn't change his tune. I just hope Mitch the ***** has the balls to stand up to him.


And the Lakers will spend the next two years with their current roster minus Malone, Medvedenko and Fisher and plus the LLE ROFLMFAO......that's a pretty crappy team if you send Shaq to the bench.

Laker fans = know they're HAD by the BALLS


----------



## LB26matrixns

*Re: Re: Shaq "IF I go to Dallas, Dirk must stay in Dallas"*



> Originally posted by <b>Jamel Irief</b>!
> LOL! ROFL! LMAO! Because Shaq has no choice in where he is traded. Are you going to mock Laker fans if Shaq demands to be traded to Mercury for Diana Taurasai?
> 
> Then the Lakers don't trade Shaq to anywhere. He can retire if he doesn't want to play here. Which leaves...


Oh please.....don't trade him. Nothing would make me happier than to see him stay, and you guys be able to acquire no one, and him be unhappy, and you guys spend two years wasting time. Oh wait.....if Shaq stays, Kobe won't re-sign with LA, and you guys will STILL be over the cap without Bryant



> Not really. You seem to think cap room is the only way to acquire assets in this league. The Bulls had cap room 3 offseasons in a row and ended up with Ron Mercer, Brent Barry and Brad Miller. And now those 3 players and a lottery pick got them Jerome Williams and Antonio Davis, ROFL, LMAO and LOL all in one.


Telling me how bad the Bulls did is irrelevant. Why? This isn't about the two franchises. I KNOW the Bulls did bad. I KNEW BACK THEN the Bulls were gonna do bad. Hey man.....an idiot Bulls fan back then who went around telling everyone we were signing Tracy McGrady and Tim Duncan is just as bad as a Laker fan now who thinks LA is getting Nowitzki, Nash and Howard for Shaq. That's the difference between me and you....I know how good (or bad) my team is......I'm not the one whose future vision of my team is severely out of whack. 

What (other ways) are you gonna acquire people. Trade Devean George? Let me guess....the LAkers will get a "We messed with Shaq and we paid dearly for it, supplemental draft"??


----------



## LB26matrixns

> Originally posted by <b>Pinball</b>!
> 
> 
> True but he's only here for 2 years. There is an end in sight and we'll have $30 mill of cap room when he leaves. I want to deal Shaq only if the Lakers get something reasonable in return. A bunch of old, expensive, selfish, one-dimensional players is not equal return for a top 3 player. Dirk, a top 10 player, is more along the lines of what I want. I don't see how Dallas fans think this is a rip off. They haven't won **** with Dirk in the 4-5 years he has been there. Shaq has won 3 titles in LA and has been to 4. If Dallas adds him without giving up too much of their core (sans Dirk), they'll be no worse than the second best team in the West. Dirk, as good as he is, isn't going to take that team to the next level. Shaq can and probably will. Hell, I'd love to hang on to him if he actually wanted to stay. Unfortunately, he and Kobe are acting like babies so I'm going to side with the younger baby on this one.


It's not about not winning with Dirk. Why trade a player of value when you DONT HAVE TO lol. Dallas fans don't want to because Shaq is giving Dallas all the leverage in the world. 

You won't have 30 million in cap room. You'd get 30 million in cap relief......that's a big difference. First of all......if Shaq does stay.....if you "just keep him for two years".....Kobe won't stay. The Laker fans I think may lack the true analytical skills to know how screwed they really are. But let's just say Kobe stays......it will be for 20 million per. Inevitably you'd have to have other players under contract. It would be impossible not to have at least 15 million in players committed to 2006-07......which means you'd have more like 15 million in cap room, not 30.


----------



## futuristxen

> Originally posted by <b>LB26matrixns</b>!
> 
> 
> And the Lakers will spend the next two years with their current roster minus Malone, Medvedenko and Fisher and plus the LLE ROFLMFAO......that's a pretty crappy team if you send Shaq to the bench.
> 
> Laker fans = know they're HAD by the BALLS


I was going to say the same thing. The Lakers cannot afford to just keep Shaq and not play him. Why would Kobe stay in a situation like that? You think Shaq's just going to sit quietly on the bench and keep his mouth shut?

That would be hilarious if the Lakers just benched Shaq. If they do that, then that's about as good for the Mavs as getting Shaq and keeping Dirk. Because their whole problem is that they can't deal with Shaq whatsoever.

No Shaq, No Malone= One happy Tim Duncan.


----------



## Damian Necronamous

Then Shaq will eventually be traded somewhere that he doesn't want to go, or he'll be in a situation that he doesn't want to be in.

"Shaq wants this, Shaq wants that," I'm getting sick of this crap. Who cares what he wants? He has no real say in where he goes. Let's just trade him where ever we want.


----------



## DaBruins

i'm not worried. Shaq will get us plenty of value in return. But i dont want Walker, the guys is so overrated. If it were up to me, which it should be, i'd say screw it, trade O'neal to the Kings. Sign Divac to a 1 year deal at a good amount like he makes now and do a sign and trade:

Lakers get:
Divac
Miller
Peja
Songalia

Kings get:
Shaq
George

The trade is accepted by realgm.com, meaning everything works out cap-wise. Kings do it because a team composed of Shaq, Webber, Christie, Bibby, and George could go VERRY far for the next 3 to 4 years. 

Lakers do it because Miller is a great center in this league compared to who else is out there. Divac is a good backup for 1 year and then his salary is off our books so we can go after some other big FA. Peja is of course Peja. And Songalia is a decent young prospect who could fill the Slava void even though they have different playing styles. Payton, Kobe, Peja, Malone (maybe), and Miller is a top 3 team in the west IMO. We are instantly a much better shooting team and passing team with this trade. And we still have Rush, Luke, Divac, Songalia, and the new rookie off the bench. Plus a couple cheap but important signings and we're ok. I hope we re-sign fisher but hes going to want to get his money.


----------



## LB26matrixns

> Originally posted by <b>Damian Necronamous</b>!
> Then Shaq will eventually be traded somewhere that he doesn't want to go, or he'll be in a situation that he doesn't want to be in.
> 
> "Shaq wants this, Shaq wants that," I'm getting sick of this crap. Who cares what he wants? He has no real say in where he goes. Let's just trade him where ever we want.


YOU DONT GET IT. LMAO. 

*Why would another team give you something valuable for Shaq if Shaq calls them and says "if you trade for me, I'll leave after next season, and you'll lose Kenyon Martin (example) basically for nothing" ????*

I'm aware you want to trade Shaq wherever. Why would "wherever" want to trade for him if he doesn't want to go there? So they can have an unhappy Shaq ***** for a year and then opt out next summer? And you think you're gonna get a STAR for that?


----------



## LB26matrixns

> Originally posted by <b>DaBruins</b>!
> i'm not worried. Shaq will get us plenty of value in return. But i dont want Walker, the guys is so overrated. If it were up to me, which it should be, i'd say screw it, trade O'neal to the Kings. Sign Divac to a 1 year deal at a good amount like he makes now and do a sign and trade:
> 
> Lakers get:
> Divac
> Miller
> Peja
> Songalia
> 
> Kings get:
> Shaq
> George
> 
> The trade is accepted by realgm.com, meaning everything works out cap-wise. Kings do it because a team composed of Shaq, Webber, Christie, Bibby, and George could go VERRY far for the next 3 to 4 years.
> 
> Lakers do it because Miller is a great center in this league compared to who else is out there. Divac is a good backup for 1 year and then his salary is off our books so we can go after some other big FA. Peja is of course Peja. And Songalia is a decent young prospect who could fill the Slava void even though they have different playing styles. Payton, Kobe, Peja, Malone (maybe), and Miller is a top 3 team in the west IMO. We are instantly a much better shooting team and passing team with this trade. And we still have Rush, Luke, Divac, Songalia, and the new rookie off the bench. Plus a couple cheap but important signings and we're ok. I hope we re-sign fisher but hes going to want to get his money.


LMAO... reason 1 AMONG MANY that your trade is impossible.....

When a player is signed and traded he must be the ONLY player traded from the team who traded him. S&T players aren't eligible to be in multi-player deals from their teams side.

Second reason is you're high.......no way SAC gives that. 

Third.....even if they did.....Brad Miller would put up with Kobe's jacking for about 10 minutes before he just pouted and quit.


----------



## HAWK23

*Re: sort of like nevus with lebron.*



> Originally posted by <b>sherako</b>!
> Ah man I'm starting to fall in love with Shaq...watching him screw up the Lakers, its like poetry in motion.


:yes:


----------



## LionOfJudah

Its funny how soon a someone can loose a whole nation of fans but gain the support of all of those who previously hated him. :laugh:

Honestly I think Shaq would rather play with a shooter like Dirk just because it draws one of the opposing teams bigs out of the paint. Screwing the Lakers in the process is just a bonus.

Irony is really one of the best forms of humor. Laker fans have loved Shaq for years for his selfish egotistical ways and now that it has back fired the Purple and Gold nation is all sorts of upset. :rofl:


----------



## Jamel Irief

> Originally posted by <b>stevemc</b>!
> Its funny how soon a someone can loose a whole nation of fans but gain the support of all of those who previously hated him. :laugh:
> 
> Honestly I think Shaq would rather play with a shooter like Dirk just because it draws one of the opposing teams bigs out of the paint. Screwing the Lakers in the process is just a bonus.
> 
> Irony is really one of the best forms of humor. Laker fans have loved Shaq for years for his selfish egotistical ways and now that it has back fired the Purple and Gold nation is all sorts of upset. :rofl:


I am not pissed at him, just Kupchak.

You on the other hand always maintained that you didn't hate Shaq because he won, you hated him for his attitude and style of play and would hate him even if he played for the Mavs.

One thing all of this proves is that the Lakers were hated because they won, not because of the individual personalities on the team. Fans envious of sucess. :no:


----------



## Jamel Irief

*Re: Re: Re: Shaq "IF I go to Dallas, Dirk must stay in Dallas"*



> Originally posted by <b>LB26matrixns</b>!
> Telling me how bad the Bulls did is irrelevant. Why? This isn't about the two franchises. I KNOW the Bulls did bad. I KNEW BACK THEN the Bulls were gonna do bad. Hey man.....an idiot Bulls fan back then who went around telling everyone we were signing Tracy McGrady and Tim Duncan is just as bad as a Laker fan now who thinks LA is getting Nowitzki, Nash and Howard for Shaq. That's the difference between me and you....I know how good (or bad) my team is......<B>I'm not the one whose future vision of my team is severely out of whack. </b>


LOLTROMALOALOTA.... Weren't you the one telling Phoenix fan they wouldn't be getting a lottery choice next season? Eddy Curry will lead the Bulls to the playoffs?


----------



## Philo

Shaq is doing what any of us would do in his situation. Unfortunately for the Lakers, the big man does hold most of the cards. Don't fret Laker fans, you will still receive a mighty generous package for the big man. On the other hand, it will not be fair.


----------



## Pinball

> Originally posted by <b>Philo</b>!
> Shaq is doing what any of us would do in his situation. Unfortunately for the Lakers, the big man does hold most of the cards. Don't fret Laker fans, you will still receive a mighty generous package for the big man. On the other hand, it will not be fair.


I completely understand that. We're not going to get equal value for Shaq. I don't think anyone is asking for that, though. I'm certainly not asking for Duncan or KG in these trades. Dirk, as good as he is, is not an elite player. He's not one of the top 5-6 players in the league. At best, he's a top ten player. He's a bit of an anomaly because he has incredible touch for such a big man but that doesn't make him any better as a player. I happen to think that a Dirk, Howard, and Walker for Shaq trade is a good one for the Mavs. They still get the better end of the deal. Walker is not a good fit on that team and they can get rid of his contract. Howard is a solid young player but he can be replaced by another draft pick or FA. Dirk's loss stings a little but Nash and Finley are more than capable of knocking down perimeter shots. Dallas will be just fine without Dirk. Dallas can play hardball and refuse to trade Dirk for Shaq. However, we're under no obligation to trade him to the Mavs so we can take our time here. Dirk and Co. will continue to win 50 games a year and finish as a top 4 seed only to go out in the first and second round every year. On the other hand, they can bite the bullet and trade Dirk for Shaq and have a great chance at winning everything the next 2 years. Dallas fans may not want to part with Dirk but Cuban is all about winning. In the end I think he'll throw Dirk into the deal.


----------



## mavsman

> Originally posted by <b>Pinball</b>!
> 
> 
> True but he's only here for 2 years. There is an end in sight and we'll have $30 mill of cap room when he leaves. I want to deal Shaq only if the Lakers get something reasonable in return. A bunch of old, expensive, selfish, one-dimensional players is not equal return for a top 3 player. Dirk, a top 10 player, is more along the lines of what I want. I don't see how Dallas fans think this is a rip off. They haven't won **** with Dirk in the 4-5 years he has been there. Shaq has won 3 titles in LA and has been to 4. If Dallas adds him without giving up too much of their core (sans Dirk), they'll be no worse than the second best team in the West. Dirk, as good as he is, isn't going to take that team to the next level. Shaq can and probably will. Hell, I'd love to hang on to him if he actually wanted to stay. Unfortunately, he and Kobe are acting like babies so I'm going to side with the younger baby on this one.


Dirk is 25 genius. I think he has a little more time before we throw
in the towel. Let see, how old was Shaq when he won his first
title? He was 28 years old. So I guess when he was 25 and 26 
and he had not won a title yet it was because he sucked and
could never lead a team to the championship, right?

Laker fans and thier stupid argument about how Dirk has not won a
title yet are moronic. The team needs a couple of different pieces
and they will be right there. The moves they made last year
backfired but they are well aware of the fact that they need to
go in a different direction.

Good, I hope the Lakers eat 60 million over the next two years
then get thier expiring Shaq contract. That is clearly better than
getting some All-Stars and expiring contracts now, right.


----------



## Pinball

> Originally posted by <b>mavsman</b>!
> Dirk is 25 genius. I think he has a little more time before we throw in the towel. Let see, how old was Shaq when he won his first title? He was 28 years old. So I guess when he was 25 and 26 and he had not won a title yet it was because he sucked and
> could never lead a team to the championship, right?


Actually, Dirk is 26. Regardless, Shaq was already in the Finals in his 3rd season in the league and had taken his teams deep into the playoffs repeatedly. Outside of the one year where they advanced to the WCF because of CWebb's injury, the Mavs have underachieved every year. They've been eliminated in the first and second round every year despite having all of that offensive talent. With Shaq, you saw glimpes of greatness even when he was losing. You knew that it was just a matter of time until he got over the hump. I don't think most people get that same vibe with Dirk. 



> Originally posted by <b>mavsman</b>!
> Laker fans and thier stupid argument about how Dirk has not won a title yet are moronic. The team needs a couple of different pieces and they will be right there. The moves they made last year backfired but they are well aware of the fact that they need to go in a different direction.


"The team needs a couple of different pieces and they will be right there." Where exactly is that? Do you actually think that they are going to be as good as the Lakers, Kings, Wolves, and Spurs as they are currently consistuted? I don't. The truth is that they've been making moves every year with this team and they still haven't gotten anywhere. Dirk is by no means the problem. Neither is Nash or Finley. It is the team that is flawed. They don't have an inside presence. They don't rebound well. They don't defend well. They're not going to go anywhere unless they dramatically alter the makeup of their team. Shaq will do that for them. He immediately solves their interior defense and rebounding problems and gives them the post scorer that they've never had. Dirk could succeed with Shaq but Shaq won't come for free. A Dirk-Shaq deal is the only trade that makes sense for both teams. Shaq, Nash, and Finley are a very good trio and with a few more minor changes the Mavs will be as good as anyone in the West. 



> Originally posted by <b>mavsman</b>!
> Good, I hope the Lakers eat 60 million over the next two years
> then get thier expiring Shaq contract. That is clearly better than
> getting some All-Stars and expiring contracts now, right.


What All-Stars? Nash is the only All-Star type talent and he plays the exact same position as Gary Payton. That doesn't really help us at all. He's better than Payton but he'll have the same problems defensively that Payton had last year. Walker is not an All-Star type player in the West. The only benefit to adding him is getting his fat contract off the books. Face it, Nash and Walker is not a very good deal for LA. Dirk and Walker is the only one that makes sense for both teams.


----------



## Ballscientist

Shaq is likely to go to NETS.

Nets need salary dump.


----------



## LB26matrixns

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Shaq "IF I go to Dallas, Dirk must stay in Dallas"*



> Originally posted by <b>Jamel Irief</b>!
> 
> 
> LOLTROMALOALOTA.... Weren't you the one telling Phoenix fan they wouldn't be getting a lottery choice next season? Eddy Curry will lead the Bulls to the playoffs?


Eddy Curry leading them.....nah not really. I mean he's not the type that, at age 22, leads a team to the playoffs. The Bulls are going with more of a Pistons look with five players that are pretty good instead of two stars. Are they anywhere near as good as the Pistons.....heavens no. Are they molded in a similar style? Yes. Defensively? No. In terms of the value of each starter being closer to one another than teams like the Lakers, where you have two stars and three guys that are either done or never will have a prime? Yes. 

Are the Bulls a lock for the playoffs? No. Do I need to hear that condescending tone from a Phoenix fan when, just like you, that Phoenix fan ALSO thinks his team is much better than it is? No. 

But the fact is.....the Bulls HAVE taken a step up with this draft, and with the looming signing of Euro sharpshooter Marcijauskas. Was I this optomistic after last seasons draft? No. Was this years much better? Yes.

Look at the Bulls roster:

Curry, Davis
Chandler, Williams
Deng, Johnson
Gordon, Macijauskas
Hinrich, Duhon Pargo

And consider that the Bulls will be able to sign one more decent SF/SG with the MLE......and then you look at the rest of the East and you get excited.

Teams that didn't do anything in the draft:

Miami: Needed a PG and a center BAD. Got a high school wing? LOL. Safe to say that with the probable loss of Rafer Alston and Rasual Butler.....the Bulls can make headway on this team. I like our chances better with Deng and Gordon on Caron Butler and Dwayne Wade than I did when it was Kendall Gill and Ronald Dupree.

New Jersey: No first rounder. Talk is they're moving Martin or Kidd. Martin's move could net them nothing. Right now, you have to think the Bulls could make a move here.

Boston: Getting worse and worse. The Bulls absolutely WILL overtake Boston this coming year. They are just a mess. Danny Ainge is awful.

Charlotte: Right there you're talking about a guaranteed 3 wins for every team that plays Charlotte 4 times. 

Orlando: LOL. 

Washington: Stackhouse KILLED us. Our problem against Washington was wings. Teams who could attack you with your wings absolutely killed Chicago. Why. Kendall Gill was our best wing.....need I say more. 

Atlanta: LOL.....they managed to get WORSE from the offseason. 

Milwaukee: No draft

New York Knicks: No draft

Right there.......if you can manage to be better than 7 or those 9 teams......playoffs. I don't think that would be a hard task for most teams who added two players like Gordon and Deng. 

*Now if I was you, Laker fan....I'd be predicting 5 seeds and 4 seeds lol. Nah.....I'm just thinking the Bulls might have enough to barely make it. Because they are so great? Nah......because a lot of east teams are being fiscally afraid and drafting poorly, or NOT at all. A lot of these teams leveraged their future a year or two ago. The Bulls just cashed in their chips and traded for a present pick THIS year. I think they'll be ok.*


----------



## LionOfJudah

> Originally posted by <b>Jamel Irief</b>!
> 
> 
> I am not pissed at him, just Kupchak.
> 
> You on the other hand always maintained that you didn't hate Shaq because he won, you hated him for his attitude and style of play and would hate him even if he played for the Mavs.
> 
> One thing all of this proves is that the Lakers were hated because they won, not because of the individual personalities on the team. Fans envious of sucess. :no:


In the Dallas fourm I've stated I'd much rather have a younger center. I'm still not a fan of Shaq's even if he comes to Dallas it'll be very better sweet because they'll win but I will still hate the fact snaq is still playing the same way.


----------



## LB26matrixns

> Originally posted by <b>Pinball</b>!
> 
> 
> I completely understand that. We're not going to get equal value for Shaq. I don't think anyone is asking for that, though. I'm certainly not asking for Duncan or KG in these trades. Dirk, as good as he is, is not an elite player. He's not one of the top 5-6 players in the league. At best, he's a top ten player. He's a bit of an anomaly because he has incredible touch for such a big man but that doesn't make him any better as a player. I happen to think that a Dirk, Howard, and Walker for Shaq trade is a good one for the Mavs. They still get the better end of the deal. Walker is not a good fit on that team and they can get rid of his contract. Howard is a solid young player but he can be replaced by another draft pick or FA. Dirk's loss stings a little but Nash and Finley are more than capable of knocking down perimeter shots. Dallas will be just fine without Dirk. Dallas can play hardball and refuse to trade Dirk for Shaq. However, we're under no obligation to trade him to the Mavs so we can take our time here. Dirk and Co. will continue to win 50 games a year and finish as a top 4 seed only to go out in the first and second round every year. On the other hand, they can bite the bullet and trade Dirk for Shaq and have a great chance at winning everything the next 2 years. Dallas fans may not want to part with Dirk but Cuban is all about winning. In the end I think he'll throw Dirk into the deal.


Two things....

One.....Dirk is a top ten player who ISNT 32 and ISNT making 29 million dollars. He has his best days ahead of him and is making 14 million next season I think. 

Secondly......Shaq likely isn't going to let you get another deal off unless he likes it (i.e. "If I go to Sac, Peja stays). And if you don't trade Shaq.......Kobe will probably leave, and Dallas will be fine. Dallas' biggest problem is NO big man. Is Podkolzine a good big man. NO! HE's a project. Is he eons more of a force than anything they've had? Yes. Can he just do the dirty work on defense at center and just make sure they don't get hurt too bad there so that Dirk, Finley and Nash can take it home? Yes he is capable of that.


----------



## LB26matrixns

> Originally posted by <b>Pinball</b>!
> 
> 
> Actually, Dirk is 26. Regardless, Shaq was already in the Finals in his 3rd season in the league and had taken his teams deep into the playoffs repeatedly. Outside of the one year where they advanced to the WCF because of CWebb's injury, the Mavs have underachieved every year. They've been eliminated in the first and second round every year despite having all of that offensive talent. With Shaq, you saw glimpes of greatness even when he was losing. You knew that it was just a matter of time until he got over the hump. I don't think most people get that same vibe with Dirk.


But Dirk IS 26. The Shaq you speak of is no longer with us. Dirk's best days, be they even lower in value than Shaq's best days are still ahead of him. You don't trade for player's pasts.........you trade for their future. BTW if Dirk sucks so bad or whatever word you would use to label your description of him......why do you want him so bad? 





> "The team needs a couple of different pieces and they will be right there." Where exactly is that? Do you actually think that they are going to be as good as the Lakers, Kings, Wolves, and Spurs as they are currently consistuted? I don't. The truth is that they've been making moves every year with this team and they still haven't gotten anywhere. Dirk is by no means the problem. Neither is Nash or Finley. It is the team that is flawed. They don't have an inside presence. They don't rebound well. They don't defend well. They're not going to go anywhere unless they dramatically alter the makeup of their team. Shaq will do that for them. He immediately solves their interior defense and rebounding problems and gives them the post scorer that they've never had. Dirk could succeed with Shaq but Shaq won't come for free. A Dirk-Shaq deal is the only trade that makes sense for both teams. Shaq, Nash, and Finley are a very good trio and with a few more minor changes the Mavs will be as good as anyone in the West.


LMAO this is indicative of how out of touch with reality you are. Dallas is absolutely going to be better than the Lakers next year. The Lakers have no easy solution to their problems. Trade Shaq or keep Shaq you don't have the financial flexibility to be an elite team in the West for at LEAST 2 years, maybe 3 or 4. You aren't a Spurs fan......the Spurs will be better than the Mavs. LA won't.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey

> Originally posted by <b>theo4002</b>!
> Shaqs the MAN!!!
> 
> Ahh That will be fantastic if he comes to Dallas if Dirk is still there. Steve Nash
> Michael Finley
> Antoine Walker
> for
> Shaq
> Rick Fox
> 
> 
> C: Shaquille O'Neal
> PF: Dirk Nowitzki
> SF: Josh Howard
> SG: Marquis Daniels
> PG: Devin Harris
> 
> Bench:
> Jerry Stackhouse, Christian Laettner, Rick Fox




I'm not impressed with that lineup. Howard, Daniels, and Harris are talented, but you can't have championship aspirations with 3 youngsters at PG/SG/SF. Shaq and Dirk are very good, obviously, but I'm not sure about those three youngsters playing huge roles on a championship team.


----------



## Pinball

> Originally posted by <b>LB26matrixns</b>!
> But Dirk IS 26. The Shaq you speak of is no longer with us. Dirk's best days, be they even lower in value than Shaq's best days are still ahead of him. You don't trade for player's pasts.........you trade for their future. BTW if Dirk sucks so bad or whatever word you would use to label your description of him......why do you want him so bad?


When did I say that Dirk was bad? I've always maintained that he is a top 10 player in the league, albeit towards the bottom. My only beef is that fans seem to think that just because Dirk is younger that he will give Dallas a better chance to win than Shaq will. Shaq may be 32 but he is still better than just about anyone in the league not named Duncan or Garnett. He'll likely continue to be a force for 2 maybe 3 years if he's lucky. In that period of time I think that he'll give you a much better chance to win a ring than Dirk will. As for the reason why I want Dirk so badly, I think that he and Kobe would make a great duo. Kobe is a young superstar who is about to enter his prime and he and Dirk would make a great 1-2 punch for the Lakers. It's good for Dirk because he is finally paired with a player that is better than him. I think he'll be much more effective as the #2 option than as a #1 option. It's good for Kobe because he obviously can't win by himself. Dirk is another superstar and he'll draw some attention away from Kobe and allow him to attack the basket without clogging the paint. He's also a reliable 3pt shooter, something that Kobe has never had. These two aren't going to win a title by themselves like Shaq and Kobe did but with the right pieces (a true C, quick young PG, athletic SF) they could make some noise.


----------



## LB26matrixns

> Originally posted by <b>Pinball</b>!
> 
> 
> When did I say that Dirk was bad? I've always maintained that he is a top 10 player in the league, albeit towards the bottom. My only beef is that fans seem to think that just because Dirk is younger that he will give Dallas a better chance to win than Shaq will. Shaq may be 32 but he is still better than just about anyone in the league not named Duncan or Garnett. He'll likely continue to be a force for 2 maybe 3 years if he's lucky. In that period of time I think that he'll give you a much better chance to win a ring than Dirk will. As for the reason why I want Dirk so badly, I think that he and Kobe would make a great duo. Kobe is a young superstar who is about to enter his prime and he and Dirk would make a great 1-2 punch for the Lakers. It's good for Dirk because he is finally paired with a player that is better than him. I think he'll be much more effective as the #2 option than as a #1 option. It's good for Kobe because he obviously can't win by himself. Dirk is another superstar and he'll draw some attention away from Kobe and allow him to attack the basket without clogging the paint. He's also a reliable 3pt shooter, something that Kobe has never had. These two aren't going to win a title by themselves like Shaq and Kobe did but with the right pieces (a true C, quick young PG, athletic SF) they could make some noise.



How long will Shaq be that good? A year? Two? MAYBE?


----------



## jc76ers

jamal iref,



> One thing all of this proves is that the Lakers were hated because they won, not because of the individual personalities on the team. Fans envious of sucess.


looks like your still sticking with your theory heh??? well...the pistons just won, and lets see how many people hate them??? not much!! so your theory is wrong

fans don't like the lakers because 
1) they get preferential treatment
2) some fans don't like shaq
3) some fans don't like kobe
4) a lot of the laker fans are just ridiculous in their thinking...they also like to jump on and off the bandwagon...typical LA people.

its as simple as that.


----------



## LB26matrixns

Exactly 76ers.....

I'm a Bulls fan and in Chicago.....if there is even the smallest reason to hate something from Detroit......we're all over it. BUT I didn't know one person who wasn't a Laker bandwagon sympathizer that rooted against Detroit. What's to hate? How they play the game the right way? How you know it takes everything they have to be as good as they are? How they never take the regular season off (Laker fan "nothing matters til the playoffs" -- YOU WONT HEAR THAT IN DETROIT)? How they all get along with each other and you never hear Ben Wallace and Chauncey Billups arguing over whose team it is, or why this guy signed with Detroit, or who is fat, or who is a loner? 

People hate the Lakers because they hate either Shaq or Kobe. Hell I used to root for them between Magic and Kobe......I could never root for either player though. 

Anyone who hates Shaq doesn't know him well enough. Shaq has a reputation for showing up to celebrity fundraisers and matching the entire night's donation by himself. And he never brags about it.......you have to do your research to find this out. IMO it's impossible to hate someone like that. So he doesn't like selfish Kobe.....it makes sense when you find out all the unfortunate lives that Shaq touches, that he doesn't like a prima donna pansy like Kobe.


----------



## Knicksbiggestfan

I don't know why laker's fan insist that Dirk is required for a shaq trade. It just isn't feasible for Dallas.

Shaq is probably going east IF anywhere.
It's not like you can get equal value for him when you have to face him come playoff time.


----------



## jokeaward

Dirk doesn't have to compare to Shaq. Dallas will give more.

LA:
Shaq
Cook

Dallas:
Nash
Walker
Najera
Delk
Howard
Otis Thorpe-like future first?

Stand Pat Lakers
Shaq
Slava, Cook
George, Walton
Rush, Vujacic
Payton

New Lakers
C - Welcome to the rest of the NBA.
PF - Maybe Malone, Slava, Walker
SF - Howard, George, Najera, Walton, Walker
SG - Kobe, Rush, Vujacic
PG - Nash, Payton, Delk


----------



## PigBenis

PigBenis!


----------



## Lope31

> Originally posted by <b>PigBenis</b>!
> PigBenis!


See funny name but retarted post. You are gonna have to do better then that if you wish to impress.


----------



## PigBenis

***Edited***


----------



## PigBenis

***Edited***


----------



## RunToFreeForFly

> Originally posted by <b>PigBenis</b>!
> sorry
> 
> ***Edited***[/url]


How many post before he gets banned? I say 31 

back to the topic.
The logic is:

rule1: shaq say byebye in unhappy team

stars for a shaq in bad team = no shaq no star in bad team
trade unaccepted.

stars+dirk for a shaq in Dallas = no shaq no stars no dirk in Dallas
trade unaccepted

Shaq stay = no shaq no kobe 

to simplifly:

stars for a shaq in Dallas = stars in laker, shaq and dirk in dallas = everyone happy

trade accepted

I got it. Shaq baby!!!:rock:


----------



## Tersk

I'll translate that for you 





> rule1: shaq say byebye in unhappy team


Shaq doesn't want to play for a team that doesn't want him 



> stars for a shaq in bad team = no shaq no star in bad team


If a bad team trades all their good players away for Shaq, shaq won't go there because he wants to win.



> stars+dirk for a shaq in Dallas = no shaq no stars no dirk in Dallas


If Dallas trades a few good players and Dirk for Shaq. Shaq will be in Dallas alone and won't want to be there



> Shaq stay = no shaq no kobe


If Shaq stays, Kobe probably leaves and Shaq might fake an injury



> stars for a shaq in Dallas = stars in laker, shaq and dirk in dallas = everyone happy


If Dallas trades good players for Shaq and keeps Dirk, trade accepted. Shaq and Dirk will be in Dallas as they wanted and Lakers will have good players


Am I right RunToFreeForFly


----------



## RunToFreeForFly

> Originally posted by <b>theo4002</b>!
> I'll translate that for you
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shaq doesn't want to play for a team that doesn't want him
> 
> 
> If a bad team trades all their good players away for Shaq, shaq won't go there because he wants to win.
> 
> 
> If Dallas trades a few good players and Dirk for Shaq. Shaq will be in Dallas alone and won't want to be there
> 
> 
> If Shaq stays, Kobe probably leaves and Shaq might fake an injury
> 
> 
> If Dallas trades good players for Shaq and keeps Dirk, trade accepted. Shaq and Dirk will be in Dallas as they wanted and Lakers will have good players
> 
> 
> Am I right RunToFreeForFly


not really...about 93%..Btw...good equation to words translation

:grinning:

rule 2: shaq can opte out his contract


----------



## Damian Necronamous

> Originally posted by <b>LB26matrixns</b>!
> 
> 
> YOU DONT GET IT. LMAO.
> 
> *Why would another team give you something valuable for Shaq if Shaq calls them and says "if you trade for me, I'll leave after next season, and you'll lose Kenyon Martin (example) basically for nothing" ????*
> 
> I'm aware you want to trade Shaq wherever. Why would "wherever" want to trade for him if he doesn't want to go there? So they can have an unhappy Shaq ***** for a year and then opt out next summer? And you think you're gonna get a STAR for that?


But Dallas is not the Lakers' only trade option where Shaq could be happy. I'm sure that Shaq would be very happy to play in his hometown of New Jersey with Jason Kidd and Richard Jefferson. He wouldn't mind if he went to a contender in the Eastern Conference at all.

Plus, a team that he didn't want to go to could get him, and then trade him again for even more.


----------



## Tersk

> Originally posted by <b>RunToFreeForFly</b>!
> 
> 
> not really...about 93%..Btw...good equation to words translation
> 
> :grinning:
> 
> rule 2: shaq can opte out his contract


Why thank you, hopefully one day I will speak martian as fluently as you so I can translate for everyoen here who thinks you are a NO MASKING idiot, lol


----------



## LB26matrixns

> Originally posted by <b>Damian Necronamous</b>!
> 
> 
> But Dallas is not the Lakers' only trade option where Shaq could be happy. I'm sure that Shaq would be very happy to play in his hometown of New Jersey with Jason Kidd and Richard Jefferson. He wouldn't mind if he went to a contender in the Eastern Conference at all.
> 
> Plus, a team that he didn't want to go to could get him, and then trade him again for even more.


And if he goes to NJ it will be the same thing.....he'll pick the players he wants there and say "no player x, no trade"

And the last line of your post is laughable.....taking on a 32 million dollar contract that you aren't sure you can move and that you gave a star or two for.....is the low risk way to go LOL.


----------



## Damian Necronamous

> Originally posted by <b>LB26matrixns</b>!
> 
> 
> And if he goes to NJ it will be the same thing.....he'll pick the players he wants there and say "no player x, no trade"
> 
> And the last line of your post is laughable.....taking on a 32 million dollar contract that you aren't sure you can move and that you gave a star or two for.....is the low risk way to go LOL.


Not really. :whofarted If he went to a place that he didn't want to be, then he wouldn't be in Dallas. The team that the Lakers traded him to could then just trade him to the Mavericks. They could get a bunch of future picks, cash, Walker's expiring and guys like Nash and Finley.

I'm not in a heated argument with you, so you don't need to act like an ***. Besides, With NJ it wouldn't be that hard. The guy he'd want to stay would be Jason Kidd, and the Lakers wouldn't want him in the deal.


----------



## LB26matrixns

> Originally posted by <b>Damian Necronamous</b>!
> 
> 
> Not really. :whofarted If he went to a place that he didn't want to be, then he wouldn't be in Dallas. The team that the Lakers traded him to could then just trade him to the Mavericks. They could get a bunch of future picks, cash, Walker's expiring and guys like Nash and Finley.
> 
> I'm not in a heated argument with you, so you don't need to act like an ***. Besides, With NJ it wouldn't be that hard. The guy he'd want to stay would be Jason Kidd, and the Lakers wouldn't want him in the deal.


How do you know he wouldn't want Jefferson/Martin more? Kidd isn't a half court PG.....

I'm not acting like an ***......so you can stop insulting me any time 

Also.....NJ doesn't take that risk. What if Dallas says no way at that point and just figures "if he's off LA, we're good"......Then they're stuck in the "nightmare scenario"


----------



## therealdeal

Any team wanting to trade for Shaq better make sure that D.Stern and his refs are coming along with that deal. Otherwise, as Detroit series proved, when refs call it fairly, Shaq is not worth aquiring even for a couple of bags of manure.

Chicago, Philly and New York being big markets could convince Stern to make sure Shaq gets away with murder again for a few more years, especially since he'd be drooling over possible ratings for something like a New York with Shaq vs Lakers with Kobe finals.

If Shaq goes to some other smaller market team with medium level talent, he'll just silently fade and die like the crap he is.
Stern has no use for him and is finished with him in that case.
Shaq never led anything or anybody anywhere on his own. He is the biggest fraud in the history of sports. In a fairly officiated game, he can't beat a team with Ben Wallace ( undrafted, undersized and offensively completely incompetent center) and a limping, injured, playing at best at 50% Rasheed Wallace.


----------



## hobojoe

> Originally posted by <b>therealdeal</b>!
> Otherwise, as Detroit series proved, when refs call it fairly, Shaq is not worth aquiring even for a couple of bags of manure.


By scoring 26.6 ppg and grabbing 10.8 rpg, Shaq obviously proved that he sucks and should retire right now, I agree.


----------



## Minstrel

> Originally posted by <b>therealdeal</b>!
> Any team wanting to trade for Shaq better make sure that D.Stern and his refs are coming along with that deal. Otherwise, as Detroit series proved, when refs call it fairly, Shaq is not worth aquiring even for a couple of bags of manure.


Shaq was the most effective player on either team in the Finals. Easily.

He did finally run into some of the foul trouble that I believe should have always been there for him, but he was still a dominant force who could have been much more dominant had he been fed the ball more.


----------



## therealdeal

> Shaq was the most effective player on either team in the Finals. Easily.


No he wasn't. He had 2 good games and three bad ones. The 2 good ones were there because Detroit ignored him and let him have his while concentrating on stopping Kobe and the rest of the team.

Shaq got his points , but in the process took out the entire team out of the game, and even in those "good " games, when the 4th quarter rolled along and Detroit decided to play defense on him, he couldn't even get open to receive a pass. 

Foul trouble is his problem. He should have been in foul trouble his entire career. He only has D.Stern and the refs to thank that he wasn't . He's useless without them, he'd have averaged 1/2 an hour sitting on the bench in foul trouble for his whole career had refs not given him a free pass to run over people at will..



> By scoring 26.6 ppg and grabbing 10.8 rpg, Shaq obviously proved that he sucks and should retire right now, I agree.


Mc Grady averaged 30/6/6 for the whole season and still managed to lose over 60 games. It's easy to score when you only care about your numbers and don't give a @#$% about the team.


----------



## Jamel Irief

Nothing is more amusing than Bulls fans acting condescending.


----------



## "Matt!"

> Originally posted by <b>therealdeal</b>!
> Otherwise, as Detroit series proved, when refs call it fairly, Shaq is not worth aquiring even for a couple of bags of manure.
> 
> In a fairly officiated game, he can't beat a team with Ben Wallace ( undrafted, undersized and offensively completely incompetent center) and a limping, injured, playing at best at 50% Rasheed Wallace.


I hate conspiracy theorists.

So Shaq, with nothing even resembling a post, three-point, or mid-range presence to help him in this series, playing against 4 guys rotating to defend him to stay fresh, is at fault here?

Shaq had who coming off the bench to spell him? Slava Medvedenko? The Pistons could afford to send Ben Wallace, Rasheed Wallace, Elden Campbell, and Mehmet Okur (at times) through the post to hack, and chop, and pull, and trip, and grab Shaq as he tried to get position.

But that's all in a fairly officiated game, right? When Shaq legally uses his body to get position, the other plays can grab his arms down, hook his midsection, hit him in the back, slap his arms are he shoot, hit his head when he dunks, and cut under him when he tries to rebound?

That's all fairly officialed right? Or do you just have your hater glasses on to see all this?


----------



## jstempi

Am I the only avid LA sports talk junkie that didn't hear this rumor? I think its made up.

Like I mentioned to someone else quoting this Shaq demand for Dallas to keep Dirk rumor, if it is true and Shaq's gonna play that way, the Lakers would rather dump him on a crappy team for expiring contracts than give him away to Dallas so they can dominate. Despite being managed by Kupchek, the Lakers aren't that stupid.


----------



## Tersk

> Originally posted by <b>jstempi</b>!
> Am I the only avid LA sports talk junkie that didn't hear this rumor? I think its made up.
> 
> Like I mentioned to someone else quoting this Shaq demand for Dallas to keep Dirk rumor, if it is true and Shaq's gonna play that way, the Lakers would rather dump him on a crappy team for expiring contracts than give him away to Dallas so they can dominate. .


Then he will teach the GM of --- (insert team name here) that he will opt out and the end of the season and they just got majorly Kobe'd



> Despite being managed by Kupchek, the Lakers are that stupid


Nice to see you come to your sense


----------



## Kunlun

If Shaq goes to Dallas I'm sure he would want both Nash and Dirk there so that would leave Walker and Stackhouse and maybe Tony Delk or someone to fill in the hug salary Shaq makes. Shaq could demand this deal and refuse to play for the Lakers with a fake injury if he doesn't get his way, that' just the way it is.


----------



## jstempi

Like I said, if Shaq does decide to force the Lakers into a bad trade, picking the players his new team can trade in return, then the Lakers will simply dump him on a team like Golden State for a bunch of expiring contracts or resigned players that were gonna leave anyway. Shaq for Van Exel, Uncle Cliffy, and a resigned Dampier would work under the cap and GS could actually get some ratings for a year or they could deal Shaq elsewhere for the crap Dallas is offering.


----------



## Minstrel

> Originally posted by <b>therealdeal</b>!
> 
> No he wasn't. He had 2 good games and three bad ones. The 2 good ones were there because Detroit ignored him


Actually, the three "bad ones" were due to the Lakers ignoring him. At virtually every point in the series, when the ball was entered into him, Detroit had nothing they could do with him. Only when they happened to successfully fight him into higher post positions could they hope he'd miss. Otherwise, they fouled or conceded the basket.

Check out the sheer number of shots Kobe took in Shaq's "bad games." That's why he had low scoring statistics...because someone else was shooting the ball. Badly.



> Foul trouble is his problem. He should have been in foul trouble his entire career.


That's true. And yet he's highly dominant even around all those fouls.



> Mc Grady averaged 30/6/6 for the whole season and still managed to lose over 60 games.


Yes, that's because quality of teammates matter. McGrady had terrible ones, meaning the Magic weren't going to go anywhere no matter how good McGrady was.


----------



## jokeaward

It's not that radical of an idea. If he's on a really bad team, the owner will be happy to draw some fans and LET him opt out. That's a LOT of salary off the books, which owners crave.


----------



## mook

> Originally posted by <b>jstempi</b>!
> Like I said, if Shaq does decide to force the Lakers into a bad trade, picking the players his new team can trade in return, then the Lakers will simply dump him on a team like Golden State for a bunch of expiring contracts or resigned players that were gonna leave anyway. Shaq for Van Exel, Uncle Cliffy, and a resigned Dampier would work under the cap and GS could actually get some ratings for a year or they could deal Shaq elsewhere for the crap Dallas is offering.


that sounds like a worse trade to me than just making Shaq happy by trading for Nash + Finley + filler. 

I guess what you're saying is that LA will get SOME value out of trading Shaq, which isn't really being debated. your Golden State scenario is the bottom of the barrel, and if I were a Laker fan I'd be pretty depressed that this is the last line of hope for trading perhaps the most dominant player in NBA history. 

from what I can tell, any way you look at it LA is going to wind up (at best) a 5th or 6th seed next year. assuming Kobe isn't convicted.


----------



## jstempi

> Originally posted by <b>theWanker</b>!
> that sounds like a worse trade to me than just making Shaq happy by trading for Nash + Finley + filler.


Not really…

If you trade for Nash, Finley and fillers, essentially what you wind up with is a poor defensive point guard who can shoot, handle and distribute the ball well. The Lakers already have a PG who can handle and distribute the ball well and they have Kobe to shoot the outside shots. In all Nash is still an upgrade, but not a huge one. You also get Finley, a nice player, but he is poor defensively as well and has a bad contract that takes up any cap room the Lakers would have had in the near future. If the Lakers are gonna take on a big contract that kills their cap room hopes, it wont be yet another perimeter player (remember they have Kobe) that cant defend. The Lakers would rather have Walker than Finley due to the contract being movable. And lets not get into fillers, sure some youth would be nice but any fillers Dallas can throw in doesn’t override the above-mentioned issues. 

In my trade idea with Golden State, Van Exel, similar to Walker, is an expiring contract that can be moved in a subsequent trade and the Lakers get Dampier, which is a major upgrade considering the Lakers don’t have a center after moving Shaq. 

In all it boils down to either taking a minor upgrade at the PG spot in Nash plus prospects, plus using Walker as trade bait or taking a major upgrade in Dampier and using Van Exel as trade bait. Considering the Lakers are devoid of big men…they’d go with the Golden State trade IMHO.



> I guess what you're saying is that LA will get SOME value out of trading Shaq, which isn't really being debated. your Golden State scenario is the bottom of the barrel, and if I were a Laker fan I'd be pretty depressed that this is the last line of hope for trading perhaps the most dominant player in NBA history.


We are depressed at losing Shaq in the first place, but in the end, it’s his unwillingness to take a pay cut that has created/fueled the problem. I don’t think the GS idea is the bottom of the barrel, the Lakers could certainly do worse…especially if they take on bad contracts like Finley. Getting Dirk and others would be better than the GS idea of course, but I think I’ve shown that a Dallas trade without Dirk is worse. Additionally, I’m not convinced a CWebb trade for Shaq would be better than this GS idea. Cwebb is oft injured and getting old to and he’s got a few more years on his contract than Shaq does. The trade would have to also include either Peja, Miller, or Bibby or maybe Christie and Bobby Jackson.




> from what I can tell, any way you look at it LA is going to wind up (at best) a 5th or 6th seed next year. assuming Kobe isn't convicted.


Why do you even feel the need to bring up the Kobe trial, we all know it is a contingency and those of us who don’t live in a box know the chances of him getting convicted is minimal. I wish the immature kiddies that feel the need to bring it up in every post about the lakers or kobe would open a newspaper or take a law class and realize it is not “if Kobe isn’t convicted” its “when Kobe is acquitted.”


----------



## mook

> Why do you even feel the need to bring up the Kobe trial, we all know it is a contingency and those of us who don’t live in a box know the chances of him getting convicted is minimal. I wish the immature kiddies that feel the need to bring it up in every post about the lakers or kobe would open a newspaper or take a law class and realize it is not “if Kobe isn’t convicted” its “when Kobe is acquitted.”


first time i've been referred to as an "immature kiddy" on this board. well, given my moniker, I suppose it's been a long time coming. 

anyway, I wasn't adding the trial thing in to rub salt in anyone's wounds. I was just qualifying my prediction of their performance. I felt I would be drastically overrating the Lakers if I hadn't qualified my statement. as Marge Gundersen once said, "You have no call to get snippy with me; I'm just trying to do my job here."


----------



## mook

anyway, on to the actual meat of the argument: 

of all the players mentioned in the (non-Dirk) Dallas and Golden State scenarios, I (as a Blazer fan) put the value of Nash way above anybody else. 

expiring contracts are nice for occasionally adding talent (we got SAR + Ratliff for Sheed's), but I don't think you pass up on a drastically superior player like Nash just to get them.


----------



## jstempi

> Originally posted by <b>theWanker</b>!
> 
> 
> first time i've been referred to as an "immature kiddy" on this board. well, given my moniker, I suppose it's been a long time coming.
> 
> anyway, I wasn't adding the trial thing in to rub salt in anyone's wounds. I was just qualifying my prediction of their performance. I felt I would be drastically overrating the Lakers if I hadn't qualified my statement. as Marge Gundersen once said, "You have no call to get snippy with me; I'm just trying to do my job here."


Ok, disregard my complaint. Just dont let it happen again.


----------



## jstempi

> Originally posted by <b>theWanker</b>!
> anyway, on to the actual meat of the argument:
> 
> of all the players mentioned in the (non-Dirk) Dallas and Golden State scenarios, I (as a Blazer fan) put the value of Nash way above anybody else.
> 
> expiring contracts are nice for occasionally adding talent (we got SAR + Ratliff for Sheed's), but I don't think you pass up on a drastically superior player like Nash just to get them.


Problem is we'd have to hear GP whine all year about not getting PT backing up Nash and since he's almost as untradeable as Shaq, he'll be here all year. Now nobody wants to hear that!! :grinning: 

Anyway, Nash is going to be over-priced. Teams like the Clippers will offer him the max, so why would we want two max perimeter players and nuthin in the middle? Oh wait, maybe a Dallas fan can best answer that question.


----------



## mavsman

> Originally posted by <b>jstempi</b>!
> 
> 
> Problem is we'd have to hear GP whine all year about not getting PT backing up Nash and since he's almost as untradeable as Shaq, he'll be here all year. Now nobody wants to hear that!! :grinning:
> 
> Anyway, Nash is going to be over-priced. Teams like the Clippers will offer him the max, so why would we want two max perimeter players and nuthin in the middle? Oh wait, maybe a Dallas fan can best answer that question.


Nash will not be maxed out despite someone on the board 
claiming the Clippers would give him max money. That's not going
to happen.

I agree that if I am the Lakers I would rather have Walkers
expiring contract rather than Finley's. Finley is a really good
player and is not nearly as bad defensively as many claim. It's
amazing how much better a defensive player you become if you
have shot blockers backing you up, but thats another story.

So if Payton is going to complain about sharing time with Nash
then send him over to the Mavs with Shaq and we will add another
similar expiring contract in Laettner that can be moved or just
let it expire.

Anyway I still believe that an All-Star PG in his prime along with
some young talented players and some expiring contracts is a
better deal.

Nash
Walker
Howard
choose one from (Podkolzine, Najera, Stackhouse, Fortson, Bradley, Delk, Abdul-Wahad)
Laettner

for 

Shaq
Payton


----------



## jstempi

> Originally posted by <b>mavsman</b>!
> Nash will not be maxed out despite someone on the board
> claiming the Clippers would give him max money. That's not going
> to happen.


It will still be more than he should get. And I'm sure someone else will offer him more than the Lakers want to pay, then should the lakers match it so the sign and trade can happen? Naw, might as well use payton (he's not as bad as he looked last year defensively...nash or any point guard would have had the same problems if you switched the two since Shaq doesnt defend the pick and roll).



> So if Payton is going to complain about sharing time with Nash
> then send him over to the Mavs with Shaq and we will add another
> similar expiring contract in Laettner that can be moved or just
> let it expire.
> 
> Anyway I still believe that an All-Star PG in his prime along with
> some young talented players and some expiring contracts is a
> better deal.
> 
> Nash
> Walker
> Howard
> choose one from (Podkolzine, Najera, Stackhouse, Fortson, Bradley, Delk, Abdul-Wahad)
> Laettner
> 
> for
> 
> Shaq
> Payton


I guess it depends on what GS wants. The Lakers still need to get Dampier...they are desperate for a big man. If GS will do Walker for Dampier then it would be okay, but then you still have the issue of trading within your conference to make a team drastically better than you are. And besides, if Shaq is gonna be a jerk and not let LA have Dirk, why give him what he wants?


----------



## mook

I actually think Payton has got a lot of trade value. his deal is also an expiring contract. Portland would be THRILLED to trade a mediocre player (Patterson? can he finally get along with Kobe?) to get somebody to replace Damon Stoudamire. 

I guess what I'm saying is that if I'm LA, I just try to amass the most talent available now when you cash in the Shaq trading chip. Afterwards you figure out how to reshuffle things to make it all work. That's called "rebuilding."


----------

