# Shaq traded to Suns [merged]



## Mr. Chuck Taylor (Aug 2, 2004)

*Shaq for Marion trade in the works?*

interesting

http://www.miamiherald.com/594/story/407442.html


----------



## LameR (Jan 4, 2004)

*Re: Shaq for Marion trade in the works?*

At first I was like, "Oh that's interesting." Then I realized Shaq would be on the Suns and I laughed a little.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

*Re: Shaq for Marion trade in the works?*

how in the world does that help the Suns?


----------



## Steez (Nov 28, 2002)

*Re: Shaq for Marion trade in the works?*

Suns are a running team, no way.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

*Re: Shaq for Marion trade in the works?*

Wow, I don't really know how a slow fat center fits in with a running team.


----------



## Resume (Jul 17, 2007)

*Re: Shaq for Marion trade in the works?*

If the Suns do this... they are more stupid then Memphis trading Gasol for dirt.


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

*Re: Shaq for Marion trade in the works?*

please let this be true (since it would kill the suns :lol: ).


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

*Re: Shaq for Marion trade in the works?*



hasoos said:


> Wow, I don't really know how a slow fat center fits in with a running team.


especially when the slow fat center still has 2.5 years @ 20 million per.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

*Re: Shaq for Marion trade in the works?*

The one thing I can say, is the Suns made a huge error when they traded Kurt Thomas last year. He was the one guy that gave them a physical presence on the front line, and depth. Now when Amare gets in foul trouble (Which he does, all the time), you see our old freind Brian Skinner come in. You know the rest. 

At the same time, the Suns have plenty of small forwards, and by bringing in Shaq, could move Amare to his natural position at PF. Move Marion, use Hill and Diaw at SF and you have a rounded lineup. 

Unfortunately, I don't think Shaq has enough gas in the tank to do it again.


----------



## Resume (Jul 17, 2007)

*Re: Shaq for Marion trade in the works?*

He has no gas... except, ya know, that kind of gas that fat old men have.


----------



## Superblaze (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: Shaq for Marion trade in the works?*

I only want this trade to happen if Shaq promises to wear Steve Nash's shorts during games. That way he'd be forced to lose weight as fast as possible.


----------



## Superblaze (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: Shaq for Marion trade in the works?*

I only want this trade to happen if Shaq promises to wear Steve Nash's shorts during games. That way he'd be forced to lose weight as fast as possible.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: Shaq for Marion trade in the works?*

Let's trade Darius and Raef for Shaq


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

*Re: Shaq for Marion trade in the works?*



Hap said:


> Let's trade Darius and Raef for Shaq


no, for wade!


----------



## alext42083 (Nov 7, 2003)

*Re: Shaq for Marion trade in the works?*



hasoos said:


> The one thing I can say, is the Suns made a huge error when they traded Kurt Thomas last year. He was the one guy that gave them a physical presence on the front line, and depth. Now when Amare gets in foul trouble (Which he does, all the time), you see our old freind Brian Skinner come in. You know the rest.
> 
> At the same time, the Suns have plenty of small forwards, and by bringing in Shaq, could move Amare to his natural position at PF. Move Marion, use Hill and Diaw at SF and you have a rounded lineup.
> 
> Unfortunately, I don't think Shaq has enough gas in the tank to do it again.


That's the only reason I see the Suns doing this. They made a mistake letting go of Thomas. All Phoenix would need is for Shaq to play defense, defend the paint, rebound and outlet the ball to Nash. They don't need him going off for 20-25 points a game.

It won't be that horrible a move if Phoenix sees its championship window closing in two years, and they see Nash not being able to play for four, five more years.
It's certainly a desperation move. If they did this, I bet they wish they traded Amare for KG in the summer.


----------



## craigehlo (Feb 24, 2005)

*Re: Shaq for Marion trade in the works?*

That would be a disaster for the Suns. He would clog the lane and be injured 1/2 he time. Makes no sense especially since the Suns are one of the more frugal franchise's lately that don't want to pony up the luxury tax.


----------



## craigehlo (Feb 24, 2005)

*Re: Shaq for Marion trade in the works?*

I'd offer up this trade to Phoenix. Probably unrealistic, but who knows?

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/featur...4~3025~2795&teams=22~22~21~21~21~21&te=&cash=


----------



## Xericx (Oct 29, 2004)

*Re: Shaq for Marion trade in the works?*

I don't mind the trade for the Suns. Personally I don't think they have a chance to win it all over other teams in the league like Boston, Detroit, the Lakers and Spurs. So they shake up their roster.....Amare and Shaq...that's big time.....Marion is replaceable IMO....they have a ton of Small Forwards including Grant Hill...Nash, Barbosa, Raja Bell, Diaw


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

*Re: Shaq for Marion trade in the works?*

The suns would love Aldridge . . .


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

*Re: Shaq for Marion trade in the works?*



craigehlo said:


> I'd offer up this trade to Phoenix. Probably unrealistic, but who knows?
> 
> http://games.espn.go.com/nba/featur...4~3025~2795&teams=22~22~21~21~21~21&te=&cash=



pointless to work marion trades because he wants a rashard-type contract, which would end up costing us almost double in luxury tax in 2-3 years when we have to pay our big 3. he's not worth it.


----------



## Sug (Aug 7, 2006)

I have a feeling they are going to alter their style of play. They will simply run when Shaq is resting. It will be amazing to see the development of that team if he does end up there. Steve Nash is not getting younger, so a deal like this makes sense. Their window is closing, so the time is now. Shaq still has something left in the tank, and if you get one ring out of him it simply makes sense.


----------



## Draco (Jun 28, 2003)

*Re: Shaq for Marion trade in the works?*

At first I kind of laughed when I heard the rumor, I mean this is the team that trades away its draft pick every year for cash and traded away two future 1st round picks just to dump a one year 8 million dollar contract of a player that contributes on the court.

But then I thought about it some more, Banks is a contract the suns want to dump. When looking at the impact of dollars in a trade, I always look at the future season as this years numbers must add up to complete the trade. So Banks has 3 future season at a total of about $13 million. Shaq has 2 more seasons for $40 million. So Phoenix would be adding $27 million in future guaranteed salary, not an outlandish amount.

The wild card is really Marion. He has an option to earn ~$18 million next season, so if he exercised that option than Phoenix only pays ~$9 million in additional salary to to have Shaq instead of Marion+Banks. Adding in luxury tax concerns and the deal could potentially be almost a wash in terms of dollars. But if instead Marion opts out of his deal and the suns want to retain him, they would have to commit WAY more salary to their future payroll than if they deal for Shaq. I think the suns are really nervous about Marion opting out this summer, they want to compete for a title the final 3 seasons of Nash's contract, but they don't want to break the bank on resigning Marion for the type of deal he wants. Add in the fact that Phoenix has competent replacements at SF in Hill and Bell, not to mention all the FA's willing to play alongside Nash for the minimum. At the same time, Phoenix would like to avoid the fans wrath of just letting Marion walk for nothing this summer.

Shaq has obviously not been able to carry a team anymore, but if all he is asked to do is be the 5th option for 25 minutes a game, well he might really excel in that role. The Suns also may be thinking Shaq and Amare matches up much better with Bynum and Gasol, as the Lakers may now be the team to beat for Nash's final 3 years of title runs.


----------



## Xericx (Oct 29, 2004)

*Re: If Shaq goes to the Suns*

it totally make sense. They aren't going to win a ring with their current roster.


----------



## Draco (Jun 28, 2003)

*Re: Shaq for Marion trade in the works?*

An alternative trade possibility I thought of is if somehow the Suns can add Boris Diaw and Ricky Davis to the deal. That would eliminate the $36 million of future salary owed to Boris. The Suns would reduce their overall payroll while having Nash and Shaq's big salaries come off the books at the same time, leaving them with two guaranteed contracts (Amare and Barbosa) and massive cap room during the summer of 2010 when Lebron and Wade are free agents.


----------



## Sug (Aug 7, 2006)

*Re: If Shaq goes to the Suns*



Xericx said:


> it totally make sense. They aren't going to win a ring with their current roster.


Makes sense for both teams really. Plus if you put Diaw back in the starting lineup I don't think they lose that much in terms of production. Diaw is pretty nice all around, and will have no trouble playing off Shaq.


----------



## OntheRocks (Jun 15, 2005)

*Re: If Shaq goes to the Suns*

Honestly I think they are one move away from a title, but this just isn't the move. Shaq is just to brittle and unable to be there when he's really needed to count. I honestly think moving Marion for him would be a mistake. But I'm not taking into account Marion's desire to move, and his contract, as I'm not sure where he's at right now with either of those.


----------



## craigehlo (Feb 24, 2005)

*Re: If Shaq goes to the Suns*



OntheRocks said:


> Honestly I think they are one move away from a title, but this just isn't the move.


The Suns really missed out on possibly getting KG or Ray Allen this summer. They need another veteran on that team to send them over the top.


----------



## Draco (Jun 28, 2003)

*Re: If Shaq goes to the Suns*

They can run with Shaq people. Look at the showtime lakers, they ran with Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. You don't need all 5 guys on the court sprinting. One guy grabbing the defensive rebounds and making an outlet pass, than hanging back a little on D is just as effective.

I hope the suns get shaq it'll make the playoffs much more interesting.


----------



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

*Re: If Shaq goes to the Suns*

Man, if he gets the Suns to the Finals, that just cements his legendary status. How many players have taken FOUR teams to the NBA Finals? That would be his 7th Finals appearance and if they won, his 5th ring.


----------



## HispanicCausinPanic (Jul 2, 2005)

*Re: If Shaq goes to the Suns*

The Kareem point is very true. He wasn't out there runnin', but he got things started.


----------



## roncag (Feb 6, 2008)

*Re: If Shaq goes to the Suns*

It definitely seems like a bold move, although not sure it's the right one. If Marion is really a cancer, maybe it would be a nice spark.


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

*Re: If Shaq goes to the Suns*

sounds like it's a done deal, pending physical.

http://realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/50725/20080205/suns_close_to_acquiring_shaq/


----------



## BlazerFan22 (Jul 4, 2006)

*Suns are close to getting Shaq says..*

ESPN Magazine's Ric Bucher on RealGM and Hoopshype.:cheers:


----------



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

*Re: Suns are close to getting Shaq says..*

While it would be amazing to see Shaq take a FOURTH team to the NBA Finals, I don't see it happening. There's a reason the Heat suck this year. He is way past his prime and doesn't fit the run and gun style of the Suns.


----------



## Superblaze (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: Suns are close to getting Shaq says..*

I personally think the Suns will find a genius way to get Shaq to fit their team and thats not necessarily mean slow down their tempo but change their overall game around to let him fit in as well as make them better overall.


----------



## BlayZa (Dec 31, 2002)

*Re: Suns are close to getting Shaq says..*

the speed they play the game isnt consistent with Shaq's fitness, unless they'd look at changing the offense which seems unlikely


----------



## HispanicCausinPanic (Jul 2, 2005)

*Re: Suns are close to getting Shaq says..*

I think it would work!


----------



## Stevenson (Aug 23, 2003)

*Re: Suns are close to getting Shaq says..*

There are two words that you are forgetting that make this work: *Steve Nash.*

He makes everyone around him better, and will make Shaq look much better than he is now. Hell, Nash made Boris Diaw into a stud.

Also, don't forget that when motivated, Shaq is at his best. *The chance to beat the Lakers*, _and _Kobe_, and _take a 4th team to the championship_, and _revive his sagging reputation, is plenty of motivation.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

*Re: Suns are close to getting Shaq says..*

I think they could make it work on offense. can you imagine running pick-and-rolls against Nash and Shaq though? it'd be a complete disaster for them. 

more than anything, though, I have a hard time imagining a team that sells away late first round picks to save money suddenly eager to take on a $20 mil/year guy who is clearly falling apart.


----------



## yuyuza1 (May 24, 2006)

*Re: Suns are close to getting Shaq says..*

Yahoo says it's a done deal, pending Shaq Fu's physical. http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_y...YF?slug=jy-shaqdeal020508&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

:eek8:

I think this is a great deal for the Suns, and we'll see them reap the benefits of it come playoff time. Also, I think this deal is sort of a knee-jerk reaction to the Gasol deal. Come on, Dallas. Make a move, and give us Harris.


----------



## Mr. Chuck Taylor (Aug 2, 2004)

*Re: Suns are close to getting Shaq says..*

I don't understand this deal. I think very highly of Shawn Marion, therefore I thought it was strange that Phoenix wasn't too excited to resign him. Of course, the explanation was they couldn't afford to do so, which I guess is understandable. But Shaq is even MORE expensive...being that his contract is longer. I think that the Suns with Marion vs. the Suns with Shaq (assuming he is healthy) is pretty close...this year. But what about the next few years? It seems like the Suns are mortgaging everything to win this year. I don't think that is a bad strategy if it greatly improved their chances...problem is, I don't think it does.


----------



## NewAgeBaller (Jan 8, 2007)

*Re: Suns are close to getting Shaq says..*

Well you have to understand that Shaq is one of the best (or was) at making the good outless pass off the rebound. He'd literally chuck it up to halfcourt in a second and start a 3 on 2 fast break. Phoenix could definately use that. Then theres also the inside presence, toughness, etc, that they're lacking. But wow, what a HUGE move by Phoenix if this goes down. If it fails, Kerr's gona be assassinated before seasons end.. If it lives up to the hype, Phoenix will rain a parade around Shaq and Kerr will be the hero who made it work..

Shaq just has to pass that physical...


----------



## NewAgeBaller (Jan 8, 2007)

*Re: Suns are close to getting Shaq says..*



Mr. Chuck Taylor said:


> I don't understand this deal. I think very highly of Shawn Marion, therefore I thought it was strange that Phoenix wasn't too excited to resign him. Of course, the explanation was they couldn't afford to do so, which I guess is understandable. But Shaq is even MORE expensive...being that his contract is longer. I think that the Suns with Marion vs. the Suns with Shaq (assuming he is healthy) is pretty close...this year. But what about the next few years? It seems like the Suns are mortgaging everything to win this year. I don't think that is a bad strategy if it greatly improved their chances...problem is, I don't think it does.


I think it's pretty much the possibility that Marion's gona walk out on them after this season. They don't want to give him the money he wants, they don't want to lose him for nothing.


----------



## Driew (Oct 20, 2007)

*ESPN is reporting that the Suns have traded for Shaq *

WTH?! Are the suns going senile?


----------



## NewAgeBaller (Jan 8, 2007)

*Re: ESPN is reporting that the Suns have traded for Shaq *

Merge.


----------



## Driew (Oct 20, 2007)

*Re: ESPN is reporting that the Suns have traded for Shaq *

Merge and update the topic title so that its now relevant.


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

*Re: ESPN is reporting that the Suns have traded for Shaq *

Yep. I heard/saw it too. It's no longer "close to". It's agree to by both teams, with finalization pending Shaq's physical. Apparently he's on a flight to Phoenix right now.

Interesting that the Suns made sure Shaq understood that they want to continue to run their offense "as is", and his primary role will be as a defensive presence in the middle.

PBF


----------



## Driew (Oct 20, 2007)

*Re: Suns are close to getting Shaq says..*



ZackAddy said:


> While it would be amazing to see Shaq take a FOURTH team to the NBA Finals, I don't see it happening.


Fourth team? Two in LA, one in Miami, then one in Phoenix..that's only 3 unless he won one with Orlando.


----------



## HispanicCausinPanic (Jul 2, 2005)

*Re: Suns are close to getting Shaq says..*

My man said he TOOK or LED 4 teams to the finals. Not won with 4 teams.


----------



## BlazerFan22 (Jul 4, 2006)

*Re: Suns are close to getting Shaq says..*



mook said:


> I think they could make it work on offense. can you imagine running pick-and-rolls against Nash and Shaq though? it'd be a complete disaster for them.
> 
> more than anything, though, I have a hard time imagining a team that sells away late first round picks to save money suddenly eager to take on a $20 mil/year guy who is clearly falling apart.


Shaq is to lazy to do the pick and roll.:cheers:


----------



## Public Defender (May 5, 2003)

*Re: ESPN is reporting that the Suns have traded for Shaq *

The Suns are officially desperate. This is a very high-stakes gamble, if the trade is truly as advertised - Shawn Marion principally, for Shaq. Sure, he'll supply a little defense in the middle, but the Suns move at a pace that Shaq hasn't been capable of since his days in Orlando. I think the Suns took a look around, saw what the Lakers had done, and expected that their championship window was about to be boarded shut. Now the only thing stopping it from already closing is Shaq's aging, aching body. I wouldn't want to be a Suns' fan right now.


----------



## Driew (Oct 20, 2007)

*Re: Suns are close to getting Shaq says..*



HispanicCausinPanic said:


> My man said he TOOK or LED 4 teams to the finals. Not won with 4 teams.


Wait...what other Finals appearance did he go to? Was it with LA and I'm just having a brain fart? :azdaja:


----------



## WhoDaBest23 (Apr 16, 2003)

*Re: Suns are close to getting Shaq says..*



Driew said:


> Wait...what other Finals appearance did he go to? Was it with LA and I'm just having a brain fart? :azdaja:


1995 NBA Finals with the Magic. Rockets swept and Shaq was schooled by Dream.


----------



## <-=*PdX*=-> (Oct 11, 2007)

*Re: ESPN is reporting that the Suns have traded for Shaq *

This is so insane/funny to me. I don't think Gasol makes the Lakers that dominant.


----------



## ProfitByProphet (Jan 31, 2008)

*Re: ESPN is reporting that the Suns have traded for Shaq *

Dallas is going to be real desperate to make a move now, hopefully Portland can take advantage of this.


----------



## mrkorb (Jun 25, 2007)

*Re: Suns are close to getting Shaq says..*



Driew said:


> Fourth team? Two in LA, one in Miami, then one in Phoenix..that's only 3 unless he won one with Orlando.


3 in LA.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaquille_O'Neal


----------



## Draco (Jun 28, 2003)

*Re: ESPN is reporting that the Suns have traded for Shaq *



ProfitByProphet said:


> Dallas is going to be real desperate to make a move now, hopefully Portland can take advantage of this.


If Dallas ends up getting Kidd, this'll be one of the most crazy months before a trade deadline ever. 3 of the 4 top teams in the conference do major trades, wow!


----------



## alext42083 (Nov 7, 2003)

*Re: ESPN is reporting that the Suns have traded for Shaq *

Well this finally screws up that makeup game that the NBA apparently wanted between the Heat and Hawks earlier this season since they had Shaq with one more foul than he was supposed to have.

I wonder what they're going to do with that.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

*Re: ESPN is reporting that the Suns have traded for Shaq *

well Phoenix wasn't going to pay the Matrix anyways and they got rid of Banks' deal, but they still had about a 1-5 chance to win it all with Marion or they could have got a better deal..Portland could have sent out a better deal, so could have chicago..ben wallace would be a better fit so would camby ( who was available in the summer). Great move for the Heat, now for their sake, don't ruin a chance at Rose or Jordan.


----------



## alext42083 (Nov 7, 2003)

*Re: ESPN is reporting that the Suns have traded for Shaq *

Yeah a very good move by Miami.
They desperately need to get younger and more athletic, and Marion and Wade should be a pretty nice tandem. It's just the rest of the team are just scrubs. They have freakin' Luke Jackson...are you kidding me?


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: Suns are close to getting Shaq says..*

Good golly, people. Going to the Suns gives him the _chance_ to _bring_ a _fourth_ team to the finals. Nothing was said about winning. The three teams are, in order, the Magic, Lakers, and Heat. Two of those three saw championships and there were multiples with the Lakers. The original post spelled it out really pretty well.


----------



## mrkorb (Jun 25, 2007)

*Re: If Shaq goes to the Suns*

If Shaq goes to the Suns, then he can't play in the Atlanta replay that came about because of his fouls. Doesn't this trade sort of make it pointless since Miami's whole deal was that they were hurt by his not being allowed to play? Hilarious.


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

*Re: Suns are close to getting Shaq says..*

If they wanted to trade Marion for a washed-up, injury-prone, overpaid center, why couldn't they have picked Raef?

I predict this trade will haunt the Suns for the remainder of Shaq's contract. 

barfo


----------



## Xericx (Oct 29, 2004)

*Re: Suns are close to getting Shaq says..*



barfo said:


> If they wanted to trade Marion for a washed-up, injury-prone, overpaid center, why couldn't they have picked Raef?
> 
> I predict this trade will haunt the Suns for the remainder of Shaq's contract.
> 
> barfo


After which they will have a ton of cap space, the flexibility to trade nash and rebuild with their younger prospects like Amare and Barbosa. They have a 3 year run, then its going to be blown up after Shaq's contract is over....or the year prior as a team would love to trade for that HUGE expiring 20 million dollars.


----------



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

*Re: If Shaq goes to the Suns*



mrkorb said:


> If Shaq goes to the Suns, then he can't play in the Atlanta replay that came about because of his fouls. Doesn't this trade sort of make it pointless since Miami's whole deal was that they were hurt by his not being allowed to play? Hilarious.



That's an interesting problem. I think he has to play the game for Miami even if he becomes a Sun.


----------



## craigehlo (Feb 24, 2005)

*Re: Suns are close to getting Shaq says..*



barfo said:


> If they wanted to trade Marion for a washed-up, injury-prone, overpaid center, why couldn't they have picked Raef?
> 
> I predict this trade will haunt the Suns for the remainder of Shaq's contract.
> 
> barfo



No kidding. This is the ultimate overreaction to the Lakers trade from the Suns. Apparently they haven't have had League Pass in Phoenix for the last two years or this wouldn't even been considered. This will haunt the Suns in a week if it goes down.


----------



## Draco (Jun 28, 2003)

*Re: Suns are close to getting Shaq says..*

ESPN said there was some fear Dallas was very close to getting Shaq and part of the reason the Suns got him was to prevent the Mavs from getting him.


----------



## Draco (Jun 28, 2003)

*Re: If Shaq goes to the Suns*



ZackAddy said:


> That's an interesting problem. I think he has to play the game for Miami even if he becomes a Sun.


I think it's obvious what should happen. Shaq was traded for Marion and Banks, so they should be allowed to play in his place. Both of them. It'll be 6 on 5, but Shaq is the size of two people anyways.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

well, this is good news for Portland. in the long term, the Suns went from a nice nucleus for the future in Barbosa/Marion/Amare to just Barbosa/Amare. by the time Portland is contending for a title, the Shaq Suns will be an also-ran. 

sort of makes up a little for the Lakers getting Gasol.


----------



## Zybot (Jul 22, 2004)

*Re: ESPN is reporting that the Suns have traded for Shaq *



alext42083 said:


> Well this finally screws up that makeup game that the NBA apparently wanted between the Heat and Hawks earlier this season since they had Shaq with one more foul than he was supposed to have.
> 
> I wonder what they're going to do with that.


Maybe the Matrix and Banks will share 5 fouls?


----------



## Zybot (Jul 22, 2004)

*Re: If Shaq goes to the Suns*



Draco said:


> I think it's obvious what should happen. Shaq was traded for Marion and Banks, so they should be allowed to play in his place. Both of them. It'll be 6 on 5, but Shaq is the size of two people anyways.


Yes -- but Marcus Banks and Marion must share the same uniform. Marion will wear Banks like a backpack.


----------



## craigehlo (Feb 24, 2005)

Marion brings a lot of intangibles to the Suns, especially in the playoffs. He's great defender, dives for loose balls and tips loose ball to other teammates for rebounds. Losing his X factor is going to doom the Suns. Steve Kerr is stuck back in the 90's with this trade. 

If they want toughness on the front line, call up the Bulls about Ben Wallace.


----------



## Resume (Jul 17, 2007)

*Re: Suns are close to getting Shaq says..*



Driew said:


> Fourth team? Two in LA, one in Miami, then one in Phoenix..that's only 3 unless he won one with Orlando.


He took Orlando to the finals. They didn't win, but Zack isn't saying he WON with 3 other teams.


----------



## deanwoof (Mar 10, 2003)

well i seem to recall some posters wanting shaq on OUR team...

bottom line is that marion and stoudemire's clashes were bigger than we knew. diaw, hill and bell will do the scrapping now. but nobody on that team besides amare even comes close to marion's athletic ability. 

at least we dont have to see marion's funky shot as much


----------



## Resume (Jul 17, 2007)

I would trade Raef and Miles for Shaq!


----------



## azsun67 (Dec 20, 2007)

How does Portland get in on this and help Miami dump salary? 3 way trade where we end up with Marion, give up Raef/Jack/ and Pauls $$$$$ for Marion and the Suns end up with Shaq (for some reason).


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

As a Trail Blazer fan, I love this trade! Makes PHX worse in the long run.

We havent faced PHX yet this year and already played Miami twice. So we wont have to go up against Marion. We now may see Shaq a few more times, if he's healthy, and that doesnt scare me at all.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

B_&_B said:


> As a Trail Blazer fan, I love this trade! Makes PHX worse in the long run.
> 
> We havent faced PHX yet this year and already played Miami twice. So we wont have to go up against Marion. We now may see Shaq a few more times, if he's healthy, and that doesnt scare me at all.


me neither. Roy/Aldridge pick and roll. Blake/Aldridge pick and roll. Jack/Frye pick and roll. pick and roll. pick and roll. pick and roll. pick and roll. Nash doesn't fight through picks and Shaq hates coming out on them. we'll be able to create wide open 16 footers all night. 

on the other end it'll be interesting to see how Shaq fits into the offense. seems to me he's going to congest a lot of what Amare likes to do. we'll see, I guess.


----------



## Xericx (Oct 29, 2004)

Look at it this way:

1. The suns were not going to win a ring with this current roster. Its the same roster from the last few years, and the rest of the league has gotten better.

2. So they shake things up by adding Shaq and his "bloated contract"

3. HOWEVER, Shaq's contract is 2 1/2 years.....which is enough time for a last dance for the Steve Nash-led Phoenix suns to try to win a ring. 

4. This year, they try to win.

5. Next year they try to win.

6. The following year, they have a 20 million dollar expiring contract for trade bait. Add to that the fact that they could decide to go with a big free agent or perhaps even trade Steve Nash to a team that wants a new championship run. They can build with 20 million dollars of Shaq's salary (or the player they can trade for his expiring contract), Whatever they can get for Steve Nash...then Amare Stoudamire, Leandro Barbosa, and Boris Diaw. That's a decent core group of guys and they can certainly lure free agents to Phoenix as it has a decent quality of life for millionaire athletes.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

While I do not think it is a good move, never say never. This will come down to Shaq, and if he has any inspiration to play well again. The problem with him has always been, is his motor running. If it is, great. If not, you better jump start it, or you will not get the effort out of him.

Phoenix showed they were not going to win this year when they lost at home to San Antonio without Tony Parker. If you can't beat SA at home without Tony Parker, there is no way you can pull it off. They needed something that would give them a signal that mentally things have changed and they have a chance.

Dallas was in the same boat when they lost to Boston without KG. They chose not to make a move, because they have been playing well, and at least they can say they didn't have Devin Harris, who would have made a huge difference in stopping Rondo.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

*Re: Suns are close to getting Shaq says..*



Draco said:


> ESPN said there was some fear Dallas was very close to getting Shaq and part of the reason the Suns got him was to prevent the Mavs from getting him.


*laugh*

"Quick, we have to destroy our team before Dallas can destroy their team!"

Dallas already has the current Shaq. His name is Eric Dampier.


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

azsun67 said:


> How does Portland get in on this and help Miami dump salary? 3 way trade where we end up with Marion, give up Raef/Jack/ and Pauls $$$$$ for Marion and the Suns end up with Shaq (for some reason).



when you figure in luxury tax marion would cost well over $100 million to keep. he's not worth that any more than rashard was.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

It is always interesting when so many people parse these trades as if the talent exchange/ fit on the floor / roster ramifications are the most important issues involved.

Contracts are the most important for many teams. Phoenix has shown that to be the case these past few years as they do everything needed to stay under the lux tax limit. 

They could have traded Marion for endings, or just let him walk, but I guess they think Shaq might actually give them the chance (no guarantees with his health) in the postseason, regardless of what he gives in the regular season. His contract length matches Nash's, establishing their window for all to see. And, despite his declining skills, I think Shaq is still something of a gate turner. Shaq, on a winning team, is a very popular draw.


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

Masbee said:


> It is always interesting when so many people parse these trades as if the talent exchange/ fit on the floor / roster ramifications are the most important issues involved.
> 
> Let me explain the priority for many teams when making these decisions:
> 
> ...



yeah, you forgot to say how obvious it is that contracts are NOT the priority for the suns in this deal lol.


----------



## BlazerFan22 (Jul 4, 2006)

Marion and Wade are going to be nice combo.


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

BlazerFan22 said:


> Marion and Wade are going to be nice combo.



true - unfortunately for heat fans, since they're only renting marion for less than half a season and he might end up costing them a lottery spot or two.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

I liken Shaq to an MLB closer.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

crowTrobot said:


> yeah, you forgot to say how obvious it is that contracts are NOT the priority for the suns in this deal lol.


Well, I rewrote to explain the nuances, but yeah, contracts are what matter.

They aren't going to extend Shaq, and his contract is the same as the aging Nash. Marion has demanded a new contract starting at $20 million per year. If they made no moves this year, they either pay Marion Shaq money for long years or lose him for nothing. If they pay Marion what he wants they have to trade Nash or Amare for ending contracts. They end up going in circles. 

By trading for Shaq, they can more easily avoid the lux tax in future years (as amazing as that is) and will have a lot of flexibility for summer 09 allowing a quick retool around Barbosa/Amare. That is all about contracts.

Two years ago, I said the Suns were in trouble with their payroll and that Marion was the odd man out and needed to be traded. They should have done it a lot sooner.


----------



## chris_in_pdx (Jul 11, 2004)

Chalk me up as one that thinks this gives Phoenix the championship this year, or at the very least gives them a great shot vs. the Celtics. A motivated Shaq is a dangerous thing, and his stats are down this year because he hates losing and he becomes disinterested, no matter what he says in interviews. I think that Shaq's nagging injuries will "magically" dissappear, and he'll be a 20/5 center with decent mobility with Nash and Amare around him.

This trade doesn't threaten the long-term success of the Blazers in my mind, because Shaq will be long gone by the time the Blazers are destroying the rest of the league.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

I'm in the camp that this helps the Suns. 

Shaq will be a force to deal with in the playoffs.


----------



## graybeard (May 10, 2003)

chris_in_pdx said:


> Chalk me up as one that thinks this gives Phoenix the championship this year, or at the very least gives them a great shot vs. the Celtics. A motivated Shaq is a dangerous thing, and his stats are down this year because he hates losing and he becomes disinterested, no matter what he says in interviews. I think that Shaq's nagging injuries will "magically" dissappear, and he'll be *a 20/5 center* with decent mobility with Nash and Amare around him.
> 
> This trade doesn't threaten the long-term success of the Blazers in my mind, because Shaq will be long gone by the time the Blazers are destroying the rest of the league.



20 and 5 center? Shaq could get up off his deathbed and give you 9 rebounds a game.


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

Masbee said:


> Well, I rewrote to explain the nuances, but yeah, contracts are what matter.
> 
> They aren't going to extend Shaq, and his contract is the same as the aging Nash. Marion has demanded a new contract starting at $20 million per year. If they made no moves this year, they either pay Marion Shaq money for long years or lose him for nothing. If they pay Marion what he wants they have to trade Nash or Amare for ending contracts. They end up going in circles.
> 
> ...



shaq's contract matching nash's is convenient but not the priority - they made the trade because of what they (right or wrong) think shaq will bring to the team. if they just wanted a proven but aging center to match nash's contract they could have done the same deal for ben wallace for a lot less.


----------



## Draco (Jun 28, 2003)

The deal doesn't cost Phoenix as much as people think. They actually save a around a million or two this year. The next two years they have Shaq's 40 million of salary, but they get rid of Marcus Bank's $13 million, so the net cost is ~$25 million if they cut Marion for nothing this offseason.

Those costs would be further negated if Marion stayed for 1 year at $18 million, or when he demanded a $100 million contract.

Add in the extra revenue Shaq will provide the Suns organization almost regardless of his on court production, and this deal starts to make some financial sense.


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

The playoffs should be fun this year, even if the Blazers don't squeak in. Kobe vs. Shaq would be classic.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

I haven't read the entire thread, so maybe it's been stated, but man did Miami play it right with Shaq.

When they traded for Shaq, the idea was you are paying big bucks for the possibilty of a championship . . . knowing you are going to be overpaying Shaq towards the end of his contract.

Well the Heat paid big bucks and got their championship . . . then trade Shaq with the remaining 2 years contract left on his gigiantic contract.

In a way, that got the best of both worlds: paid for the championship and then trade the huge contract during the time Shaq isn't worth the contract.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

crowTrobot said:


> shaq's contract matching nash's is convenient but not the priority - they made the trade because of what they (right or wrong) think shaq will bring to the team. if they just wanted a proven but aging center to match nash's contract they could have done the same deal for ben wallace for a lot less.


I am not sure I follow your point.

"No, the Suns didn't do this deal because it was contract driven, they did this deal because it was player position and career arc driven. As proof, I submit my idea that the Suns could have traded for another overpaid, fast declining center, for a bit less money. That proves it wasn't about contracts."

I don't think so. Besides the fact that Chicago doesn't make that deal as they don't want the contract headache of Marion on top of Deng and Gordon, Wallace has not had a fraction of the post-season impact of Shaq, is now considered a locker room cancer and coach killer, and maybe was of no interest to the Suns.

I never said the Suns wanted to trade Marion for nothing. They could have just let him walk. I said the primary motivation is the size and years of the contracts, and within those constraints, the GM tries to do the best they can - of course.


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

Masbee said:


> I am not sure I follow your point.




my point is the suns didn't do this deal because of contracts.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

Guy certainly is putting his neck out there...


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

crowTrobot said:


> my point is the suns didn't do this deal because of contracts.


Well, then you would be wrong.

Shawn Marion is twice the player that Ben Wallace and Shaq put together are, and he has years of high level play left in him.

Trading him is ALL about the contract.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

Masbee said:


> Well, then you would be wrong.
> 
> Shawn Marion is twice the player that Ben Wallace and Shaq put together are, and he has years of high level play left in him.
> 
> Trading him is ALL about the contract.


Yes and no. The money is one issue. I have read several times this year all has not been well in the Suns locker room. Read into it what you will.


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

Masbee said:


> Well, then you would be wrong.
> 
> Shawn Marion is twice the player that Ben Wallace and Shaq put together are, and he has years of high level play left in him.
> 
> Trading him is ALL about the contract.



trading for shaq is not about *shaq's* contract lol. everyone in the league already knew the suns weren't going to pay marion and he was gone one way or another. that's irrelevant.


----------



## Xericx (Oct 29, 2004)

crowTrobot said:


> trading for shaq is not about *shaq's* contract lol. everyone in the league already knew the suns weren't going to pay marion and he was gone one way or another. that's irrelevant.


why not? It is relevant. His contract expires the same year as Steve Nash's. 

Oh and you know who else's contract runs out that year? 

CP3.


----------



## alext42083 (Nov 7, 2003)

Hmm.. Shawn Marion could slide in pretty well in the SF spot for the Blazers in that '09 summer. Although he'd be 31 years old and not get nearly as much money as he's making now, I wonder if Portland would make a play for him if SF is still an issue with this team at that point.


----------



## Xericx (Oct 29, 2004)

Hmmm....they didn't have to use the trade exception they got from Seattle did they?


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

Xericx said:


> why not? It is relevant. His contract expires the same year as Steve Nash's.


i didn't say it wasn't relevant, i said it wasn't the priority - what shaq (supposedly) will bring to the team IS. THAT is why the deal was made, NOT for contract reasons. if money was that much of an issue they'd just let marion walk. jeez lol.



> Oh and you know who else's contract runs out that year?
> 
> CP3.


CP3 will have signed a max-deal extension long before his rookie deal runs out - he'd have to be a total moron not to. there is no way he'll be a FA in 2 years.


----------



## Xericx (Oct 29, 2004)

> Originally Posted by crowTrobot View Post
> trading for shaq is not about *shaq's* contract lol. everyone in the league already knew the suns weren't going to pay marion and he was gone one way or another. that's irrelevant.





> i didn't say it wasn't relevant,


But what about the fans thinking that CP3 would be joining the blazers in Free Agencies? Were they just smoking something?
The kicker with New Orleans is the unsettled direction of the franchise. The team is good...but who knows about the Franchise....Phoenix is very attractive in a post Shaq/Nash era as they have Amare Stoudamire. 

It may not be likely but it could be a possibility.


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

alext42083 said:


> Hmm.. Shawn Marion could slide in pretty well in the SF spot for the Blazers in that '09 summer. Although he'd be 31 years old and not get nearly as much money as he's making now, I wonder if Portland would make a play for him if SF is still an issue with this team at that point.


again, the problem is marion wants a long-term deal and he's likely to be able to get it somewhere. signing him now would mean not only 100 million in salary but tens of millions in luxury tax 2-3 years down the road when we have to pay our big 3. he's not worth it.


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

please leave my quotes in context lol. obviously i was pointing out that marion's contract isn't relevant - if it were they'd just let him walk and not bother paying shaq 40 million. shaq's contract is relevant in that it conveniently matches nash's - but again, contracts are not the primary reason this got done - the primary reason they did that is because they think it will give them a better chance of winning the west.



Xericx said:


> But what about the fans thinking that CP3 would be joining the blazers in Free Agencies? Were they just smoking something?


yes


----------



## Xericx (Oct 29, 2004)

Well, I personally think they didn't have a chance with this roster to win the west to begin with. It does take a big body to win NBA championships. IF Shaq is able to contribute, a Shaq and Amare front court is pretty good...add to that the fact he's a good passer for a big man....makes it interesting. But they have good flexibility in 2 1/2 years when their window closes.

I also agree that CP3 was a pipe dream, hence my aversion to imaginary cap space.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

hasoos said:


> Yes and no. The money is one issue. I have read several times this year all has not been well in the Suns locker room. Read into it what you will.


WHY is "all not well"?

My take: Because Marion asked for a Rashard Lewis sized extension and was been denied by the team.

So, Marion asked for a trade, which didn't happen this summer. Then with the season in full swing, Marion started *****ing about his shots (he doesn't have plays run for him, Amare does), as I am sure his agent told him PPG gets you paid in this league.

Marion is a locker room problem becuase the team won't pay him monster money that Marion thinks he deserves because he feels he does Nash and Amare's dirty work and should be paid for his sacrifice because if he was on another team and had plays run for him his stats would be insane.... blah blah blah.

And round and round we go. Back to the contract.

Try to tell me again that it is NOT ABOUT CONTRACTS.


----------



## Xericx (Oct 29, 2004)

One possibility that may prove to be intriguing is Ron Artest. Phoenix, if I'm not mistaken, has an 8 million dollar trade exception......Ron Artest conincidentally makes...7.8 and 8.4 this season and next.........it certainly adds a good defender and offensive threat.....

what are your thoughts on this possibility? Sacramento clears some cap room...maybe gets some draft picks......


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

crowTrobot said:


> trading for shaq is not about *shaq's* contract lol. everyone in the league already knew the suns weren't going to pay marion and he was gone one way or another. that's irrelevant.


Your are right. It isn't about Shaq's contract. I never said it was. It is about Marion's contract.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

alext42083 said:


> Hmm.. Shawn Marion could slide in pretty well in the SF spot for the Blazers in that '09 summer. Although he'd be 31 years old and not get nearly as much money as he's making now, I wonder if Portland would make a play for him if SF is still an issue with this team at that point.


Nope.


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

Masbee said:


> Your are right. It isn't about Shaq's contract. I never said it was. It is about Marion's contract.


so they're paying tens of millions more for shaq just because they don't want to let marion opt out and walk. ok.


----------



## alext42083 (Nov 7, 2003)

crowTrobot said:


> again, the problem is marion wants a long-term deal and he's likely to be able to get it somewhere. signing him now would mean not only 100 million in salary but tens of millions in luxury tax 2-3 years down the road when we have to pay our big 3. he's not worth it.


You really think a team is going to sign Marion for $100 million? Sure, the guy could ask for a long-term deal, but it doesn't mean he's going to get it unless a team is really desperate.
Marion is not going to make his $17 million per when his current deal is done, so would the Blazers make a play at him? If our SF is still an issue, maybe.. but most likely not. It's just a possibility or option.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

crowTrobot said:


> so they're paying tens of millions more for shaq just because they don't want to let marion opt out and walk. ok.


If you don't have all the facts you might come to that conclusion.

Marion asked for a fat extension to his existing deal that had 2 years remaining. Wanted the MAX allowed under the CBA from Phoenix. I think $20mil first year, 3 year extension. After they refused he demanded a trade.

After Rashard Lewis (in many ways an inferior player) got his monster contract, I bet based on his past comments, that Marion wanted THAT deal. He would have to opt out of his final contract year to get it.

Shaq is $20 next season, and $20mil 09-10 as an ending contract - potentially very useful.

Marcus Banks in $4.3mil next season, $4.6mil, then $4.8mil 10-11.

Marion is at $17.8 mil next season if he had exercised his option, which he said he wouldn't. Remember he demanded $20mil next season (or is it the season after that?), and raises for 2 more after that. To keep him in the fold and be stuck with Banks who didn't work out, would have cost them more than Shaq will.

Would they be better off than letting Marion walk?

Yes if they are the Clippers or similar teams that hate spending money. The Suns have good revenue and aren't afraid of spending - but only up to the lux tax limit. That is a strict order from the owner.

Thus, letting Marion walk doesn't do them much good. They preferred to trade him for a player that has some value on the floor and has a big contract that matches Nash and thus they are timing their salary slots:

They will see if the Shaq experiement works, figuring can't be any worse than Marion in the post-season where he has been bad, and see if the risky roster shakeup can't vault them into the finals this year or next.

Either way, they blow up the team and rebuild, which Nash and Shaq as ending contracts help tremendously. If they let Marion walk for nothing they lose a big contract salary "slot" without any way of getting one back. Miami and Dallas have regularly made use of this concept.


----------



## GrandpaBlaze (Jul 11, 2004)

In the aftermath of dumping Shaq, Miami, the league's worst team, is tied with Detroit at halftime. Perhaps, all they needed to get better was to get rid of the Big Obfuscator in the middle. :thinking2:

Gramps...


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

alext42083 said:


> Marion is not going to make his $17 million per when his current deal is done


i think he'll get at least 17, particularly now that he's on a rebuilding team that can work a sign/trade for young talent if they don't want to pay him.


----------



## DucRider (Dec 22, 2007)

Xericx said:


> One possibility that may prove to be intriguing is Ron Artest. Phoenix, if I'm not mistaken, has an 8 million dollar trade exception......Ron Artest conincidentally makes...7.8 and 8.4 this season and next.........it certainly adds a good defender and offensive threat.....
> 
> what are your thoughts on this possibility? Sacramento clears some cap room...maybe gets some draft picks......


Artest in SunVille would be very interesting. Not sure what they would have to give up, but Shaq and Artest with Nash and Amare would be good for the window they are in.

Maybe the Blazers could trade young talent for the Suns' unprotected 2011 first round pick (thinking high lottery pick) to go with the core group, cementing a 10 year window. Gotta see the bright side to these deals :clap2:


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

Masbee said:


> If you don't have all the facts you might come to that conclusion.
> 
> Marion asked for a fat extension to his existing deal that had 2 years remaining. Wanted the MAX allowed under the CBA from Phoenix. I think $20mil first year, 3 year extension. After they refused he demanded a trade.
> 
> ...


i'm aware of all that. you're making my point for me - the trade is about trying to win now with shaq, not about marion's contract.




> Either way, they blow up the team and rebuild, which Nash and Shaq as ending contracts help tremendously. If they let Marion walk for nothing they lose a big contract salary "slot" without any way of getting one back. Miami and Dallas have regularly made use of this concept.



why would a 20 million salary slot matter to a team that wants to stay under the luxury tax cap?


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

crowTrobot said:


> i'm aware of all that. you're making my point for me - the trade is about trying to win now with shaq, not about marion's contract.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Time for you to start figuring these things out on your own. Just know that it does. I will give you a hint: You can't do much if you are in the middle, you either need a bunch of big contracts or virtually none, if you are around the salary cap - not the same as the lux tax limit - you can't do much. 

Steve Kerr understands the issues. Thus Marion (and his contract problems) are out the door and out of Phoenix.

If you think that the Suns truly believe that Shaq will give them more than Marion, you haven't been following the NBA recently.

Shaq PER: 12.6
Marion PER: 20.2
Shaq Offensive Rating: 100, Defensive Rating: 106
Marion Offensive Rating: 118, Defensive Rating: 100
Shaq Win Shares above average: -3.5
Marion Win Shares above average: 9.5
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/o/onealsh01.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/m/mariosh01.html

We could go on and on about the numbers, that clearly show Shaq stinks - real, real bad, and last season, he wasn't quite as bad, but was still a much worse player than Marion. Marion is better now, just as he was last season and the season before. He will be better tommorow, and next year and the next and the next....

There is no way that sensible people prefer Shaq on their team at this point in time to Marion. None.... without taking CONTRACTS into consideration.

So since the Suns, obviously, don't prefer Shaq as a player to Marion the player, what can you say? 

They prefer Shaq (and the contract that comes attached with him) to letting Marion walk for nothing.


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

Masbee said:


> Time for you to start figuring these things out on your own. Just know that it does. I will give you a hint: You can't do much if you are in the middle, you either need a bunch of big contracts or virtually none, if you are around the salary cap - not the same as the lux tax limit - you can't do much.


a bunch of big expiring contracts won't do them any more good in terms of the "middle" than 1 will - nash's already covers the middle. shaq's won't benefit them unless they want to use it to go over the luxury tax limit. 



> Steve Kerr understands the issues. Thus Marion (and his contract problems) are out the door and out of Phoenix.


as i said that was happening with or without shaq. other than fascilitating the deal it has nothing to do with why they specifically went after shaq.



> If you think that the Suns truly believe that Shaq will give them more than Marion, you haven't been following the NBA recently.
> 
> 
> Shaq PER: 12.6
> ...


i say they (right or wrong) prefer shaq for reasons that go beyond the numbers. they are hoping he will allow them to match up better against SA, LA with bynum etc. they are also hoping to get something out of his leadership abilities. if you watched the press conference today if was clear that the leadership impact he could potentially have could very well outweigh what he brings on the court numbers-wise.





> They prefer Shaq (and the contract that comes attached with him) to letting Marion walk for nothing.


they prefer shaq to nothing because they want to try to win it all with their current core. contracts are secondary.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

crowTrobot said:


> a bunch of big expiring contracts won't do them any more good in terms of the "middle" than 1 will - nash's already covers the middle. shaq's won't benefit them unless they want to use it to go over the luxury tax limit.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Do you believe everything the White House says at a press conference?

Do you believe everything NBA front office's say a press conferences?

If you do to either, you are a fool.

Do you honestly think that the Suns said to themselves: "You know what, Marion is an ok player I guess, but he just isn't good ENOUGH. We need to get better. Hey, I know, let's trade him for Shaq, that will IMPROVE our team. I know he is currently the leader of the worst team in the NBA, but he will give us what we need. He will be better for us than Marion and give us a better chance to win. Gee can we make the contract issues work out, I sure hope so, as that is a secondary issue to us. Shaq is our solution and we need to find a way to make that work."

Wow. Just wow.


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

Masbee said:


> Do you believe everything the White House says at a press conference?
> 
> Do you believe everything NBA front office's say a press conferences?


of course not, but i'm also objective enough to know spin when i see it and this doesn't appear to be spin. they are sincere about trying to win now while nash has anything left, and they don't think it can happen this year with marion and are taking a desparate gamble on shaq. what's so unbelievable about that?



> Do you honestly think that the Suns said to themselves: "You know what, Marion is an ok player I guess, but he just isn't good ENOUGH. We need to get better. Hey, I know, let's trade him for Shaq, that will IMPROVE our team. I know he is currently the leader of the worst team in the NBA, but he will give us what we need. He will be better for us than Marion and give us a better chance to win. Gee can we make the contract issues work out, I sure hope so, as that is a secondary issue to us. Shaq is our solution and we need to find a way to make that work."


that's what they're hoping is true, yes. 

your alternative of the suns brass actually thinking that they would have a better shot to win the championship with marion than shaq this year, but secretly deciding and conspiring to keep quiet that contract flexibility is more important to them than odds of winning it all is what's silly.

anyway, this has gone on way too long. nice sparring.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

crowTrobot said:


> your alternative of the suns brass actually thinking that they would have a better shot to win the championship with marion than shaq this year, but secretly deciding and conspiring to keep quiet that contract flexibility is more important to them than odds of winning it all is what's silly.


Despite the fact that the Suns management does not admit that any of their key moves are primarily contract related, you still believe that in this ONE special instance that they would have been completely transparent in their priorities and motives?


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

I don't know any of the inside reasons as to why the Suns decided to make this trade, but I do know that the thought of Shaq playing on the front line with Amare has to give most teams a bit of concern, especially when you know that they have a playmaker like Steve Nash and guys on the perimeter that can fill up the hoop. Assuming Shaq's being honest when he says his hip is going to be able to hold up, I think this trade makes the Suns much more competetive for the title than they were with Marion.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

http://lebasketbawl.blogspot.com/2008/02/shaqs-new-phoenix-uniform.html


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

e_blazer1 said:


> I don't know any of the inside reasons as to why the Suns decided to make this trade, but I do know that the thought of Shaq playing on the front line with Amare has to give most teams a bit of concern, especially when you know that they have a playmaker like Steve Nash and guys on the perimeter that can fill up the hoop. Assuming Shaq's being honest when he says his hip is going to be able to hold up, I think this trade makes the Suns much more competetive for the title than they were with Marion.


You are in the minority.

Most think that even if Shaq can stay healthy, which is a much bigger risk than with Marion, that the Suns will fare much worse with their pick-and-roll offense which is their bread and butter, and they will be exposed on pick-and-roll defense as the duo of Nash and Shaq defending the pick-and-roll will be comical - possibly historically bad.

We shall all see.


----------



## Draco (Jun 28, 2003)

I dunno Masbee, I think Phoenix genuinely believes this gives them a better shot at winning a title then they had by standing pat. Remember when Amare missed the whole year and they still won all those games? Phoenix looks at Shaq as a much bigger improvement over Brian Skinner for a big man at the small cost of downgrading from Marion to Hill+Bell. They are thinking while Marion was a very solid player, his stats were inflated from playing next to Nash and in the D'Antoni system.


----------



## Sug (Aug 7, 2006)

I think Shaq is going to win his final ring with the Suns. They have enough talent, and the best playmaker in the NBA. The pick and roll with Nash and Shaq is going to be nice especially with Amare flying in from the weakside. Shaq is going to be in shape, which means you will have to double him.


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

Masbee said:


> Time for you to start figuring these things out on your own. Just know that it does. I will give you a hint: You can't do much if you are in the middle, you either need a bunch of big contracts or virtually none, if you are around the salary cap - not the same as the lux tax limit - you can't do much.
> 
> Steve Kerr understands the issues. Thus Marion (and his contract problems) are out the door and out of Phoenix.
> 
> ...


I have to disagree. The Suns feel they can get Shaq somewhat healthy and that he can help them defend the Duncans, Bynums, Cambys, Chandlers, and Diops of the West. Marion has been a zero in the playoffs. He disappears. Watch his production fall now that Nash isn't there for him.

Using PER to ultimately decide between a Shaq/Marion exchange is useless IMO. You may as well use it to decide if Kevin Garnett or Chris Paul is the better player.

Basketball has been 'Bill James'd' and it is silly.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

PapaG said:


> I have to disagree. The Suns feel they can get Shaq somewhat healthy and that he can help them defend the Duncans, Bynums, Cambys, Chandlers, and Diops of the West. Marion has been a zero in the playoffs. He disappears. Watch his production fall now that Nash isn't there for him.
> 
> Using PER to ultimately decide between a Shaq/Marion exchange is useless IMO. You may as well use it to decide if Kevin Garnett or Chris Paul is the better player.
> 
> Basketball has been 'Bill James'd' and it is silly.


See, that's the thing.

I have watched Shaq that last couple of seasons, and with my own eyes I have seen that: Shaq is bad, the Heat played better when he was off the floor, he can't move anymore, he can't defend anymore, he gets tons of fouls, he doesn't even dunk in traffic anymore.

I post what seems obvious to me having watched the dude. Then other posters talk about how this deal has little or nothing to do with contracts and that giving up Marion and Banks for Shaq will (not might) help the Suns.

Ridiculous.

I post stats to back up my observations, and then I get **** for it. Whatever.

You have your opinion, and I have mine - backed up by observation AND stats.

This deal was primarilarly contract driven. The Suns are making a huge gamble that this shakes the team up, forces the coach to adjust his gameplans, spurs other players to step up, shocks Shaq into working hard for a few months, that Shaq can stay healthy through this postseason and the next, that chemistry magically appears, that Amare gets shocked into playing defense, etc. etc.

Essentially they are praying for a minor miracle.

Just so happens that if their prayers aren't answered they will save money this season, sell more courtside seats, sell more jerseys and merchandise, and be in a better financial situation at the end of next season then if they had placated Marion to keep him (and Banks).

They decided they weren't going to win WITH Marion, so they then decided they didn't want his (Extended) CONTRACT. Banks is a bust in Phoenix and they don't wan't his CONTRACT either.

Because the owner allows spending up to the lux limit, they decided trading for Shaq and making a big bet that Shaq would become temporarily reborn again, was more interesting than trading Marion for an ending contract and taking huge heat from fans for breaking up the team. Trading for a star, no matter how worthless, is better from a PR perspective, than giving your talent away, even if that would have been the better move long-term. You notice also, that they didn't trade Marion, a top 20 player in the NBA, for another equally talented player, on a long, big deal. They could have. Easily. There are a bunch of teams in willing to deal. 

Suns sell the idea they made the trade to improve their chances in the playoffs. Shaq was the best option for that. Really? People here really think that is true? Look at all the players that have moved recently, that are on the block or teams that slumping out of contention that are ready to make a move. Shaq was the BEST option as a player - not as a player with a convenient contract?


----------



## Draco (Jun 28, 2003)

Well I agree with some of your points Masbee, the financial side of this trade was an important part for Phoenix. Contracts were a factor in what Phoenix did, especially dumping Bank's deal. The added revenue from acquiring Shaq is important. I can understand how you are skeptical that the trade improves the team, even Steve Nash said they had some skepticism. Those ESPN polls show much of the country thinks the trade won't improve the Suns. 

Some of your posts came across as saying you thought contracts were the only factor which is what I think people disagree with. The Shaq trade is not a Kwame Brown or Aaron McKie type of deal in which the player is meaningless and the only value is $$$. 

Are the Suns completely and totally wrong in believing this gives them a better shot at championship? Perhaps, but that doesn't mean the reason for doing the trade was Shaq's 3 year expiring contract.


----------

