the trading of shaquille o'neal

[playstation]

OK, i'm sure you all have read the ESPN report that Kupchak is open to trading shaq, because they will keep kobe at ANY cost. here's my question: if you're a GM, is trading for shaq worth the risk? its a high risk/high reward type of deal, but you know that if you trade for him and don't win a title right away, you just traded away a decade of a future to lose in the short term. If I'm a GM, do i stick my neck out on the line in that situation? I don't, but then again i'm no GM.

for example, if lakers said shaq for amare, matrix and the 7, would you do it? i wouldn't, but thats just me. more importantly, the person that does do it is basically writing his own pink slip. if they lose after such a trade, the GM is fired. If they win, shaq will soon retire and the team will have nothing while the lakers would have the promising talent that you once had, meaning even if you won, you'd probably be fired after a while. the only way i see this happening is if you can't get fired (ie you own the team). GM's can't make this deal, only owners can.

either way, this basically means our whole kobe thing for the past several months is a pipe dream, since Buss is willing to throw away anything and everything to keep kobe.

 

[Ryanwb]

Shaq could walk away from the game at any time. He only plays 80% of the games in a season. He is not worth the risk any more

 

[scotsman13]

at 31 million it will be almost imposable to trade him or to have a solid team based around him. so no i wouldnt trade for him.

 

[pokerface]

Thing is...Would Kobe want to play on a Shaq-less team?


Lakers better get some great players in return for Shaq...

 

[pokerface]

Could the Suns get Shaq?

They probably would want Amare for Shaq...most Suns fans would be against that I think.


What about some kind of deal without Amare involved??

 

[thegrahamcrackr]

OK, i'm sure you all have read the ESPN report that Kupchak is open to trading shaq, because they will keep kobe at ANY cost.

Am I the only person that didn't see this report????? I know all the analysts have said that he might need to be traded in order to Kobe but I never saw a quote from Kupchak. I just looked on the main page at ESPN to see if I missed it while I was at work, and didn't see a thing.

Link?

 

[Chaz]

A 32 year old Shaq for a 22 year old Amare?

Some people may think I am crazy but......NO!


As a fan, I have seen what Shaq can do, I'm interested to see what Amare can do over the next 10+ seasons.

 

[elindholm]

O'Neal won't be traded this summer. There's simply no way the Lakers would do it unless they were getting an excellent young big man in return. Who are the excellent young big men?

Jermaine O'Neal -- the Pacers will not give him up.
Amare Stoudemire -- the Suns will not give him up.
Yao Ming -- the Rockets will not give him up.

Am I missing anyone? That's it, right?

So let's take it down a notch and look at people who aren't quite as excellent.

Pau Gasol -- Memphis might trade him, but O'Neal's salary is so large that the Grizzlies would have to send over almost their entire roster.
Elton Brand -- Like O'Neal is going to play for the Clippers?
Zach Randolph -- A faint possibility, I suppose. The Blazers could offer Randolph, Abdur-Rahim, Ratliff, and Woods. The resulting Laker team would be pretty good, I guess.

Okay, so I found one possibility that wasn't blatantly absurd. But there are very few options, and most of them can be immediately dismissed. It's not going to happen.

 

[thegrahamcrackr]

I am ********, found the article....

But I totally agree Eric. Those comments are a move to try and prove how important they think Kobe is.

 

[cardsunsfan]

Well some analysts think Shaq will only play for two more years so I don't see why you make the trade. As I mentioned before Shaq to me is boring... I would much rather see Amare playing...

 

[George O'Brien]

I'm not sure it matters who is more exciting, there is about a $27 million difference in salary that is lot bigger issue. It is a paradox of the NBA that Shaq might be the most dominant player in the game and still not be worth his salary.

To have the money to afford Shaq would mean being able to afford Kobe AND T-Mac with change left over. If he were a free agent, no other team could even offer him what he makes because he would be too high a percentage of their total cap. The only teams that could "afford" Shaq in a trade would do so with bloated contracts of their own. Anyone want Allan Houston and Penny Hardaway?

The salary cap is as much a part of the rules of the game as the three point line. It could be changed, but as long as it is part of the game it has to be accounted for. Teams win by making effective use of their cap space as much as getting good coaches. It is a part of the game and in that world, Shaq is a disaster.

 

[playstation]

cuban could afford him, the package would have to start w/ nowitzki though

nowitzki, walker, 1st rd pick for shaq works under the cap

lakers keep kobe, cuban gets a shot at the title, but loses his best player for it.

 

[George O'Brien]

cuban could afford him, the package would have to start w/ nowitzki though

nowitzki, walker, 1st rd pick for shaq works under the cap

lakers keep kobe, cuban gets a shot at the title, but loses his best player for it.

There are plenty of deals that work under the cap, but only because the players involved are grossly overpaid. What they can't get is two max players with long enough contracts who can be used to build a team around. They just aren't out there.

 

[fordronken]

What would need to happen would be a team that would give a mix of young talent and overpaid veterans. Here is a deal that works under the cap involving the Grizzlies.

Lakers trade Shaq.

Grizzlies trade Bonzi Wells, Lorenzen Wright, Bo Outlaw, Pau Gasol, Jake Tsakalidis and Earl Watson.

That gives the Lakers a lineup of

Watson/Payton/Fisher
Bryant/George/Rush
Wells/George/Fox/Walton/Rush
Gasol/Cook/Medvedenko/Outlaw
Tsakalidis/Medvedenko

Sampson, Fisher, Payton or Medvedenko could very well leave. They also could try to move a wing player for a low level center like Chris Mihm.

And the Grizzlies:

Jason Williams
Mike Miller
James Posey
Stromile Swift
Shaquille O'Neal

Off the bench you've still got Battier, Smith, Jones, Watson, Bell, Humphrey. Man, the Grizzlies are deep.

Would the Grizz do it, though? I'd have to say they probably wouldn't, but I don't know. There are also lots of variations to be made with this trade.

 

[coloradosun]

I could see a three way deal with GS, Dallas and LA

Shaq to Dallas

Jamison to GS

Dampier and Dunleavy and possibly Nowitzki to LA

Have not done an entire trade checker but those guys would be the primary players involved.

 

[Bada0Bing]

O'Neal won't be traded this summer. There's simply no way the Lakers would do it unless they were getting an excellent young big man in return. Who are the excellent young big men?

Jermaine O'Neal -- the Pacers will not give him up.
Amare Stoudemire -- the Suns will not give him up.
Yao Ming -- the Rockets will not give him up.

Am I missing anyone? That's it, right?

So let's take it down a notch and look at people who aren't quite as excellent.

Pau Gasol -- Memphis might trade him, but O'Neal's salary is so large that the Grizzlies would have to send over almost their entire roster.
Elton Brand -- Like O'Neal is going to play for the Clippers?
Zach Randolph -- A faint possibility, I suppose. The Blazers could offer Randolph, Abdur-Rahim, Ratliff, and Woods. The resulting Laker team would be pretty good, I guess.

Okay, so I found one possibility that wasn't blatantly absurd. But there are very few options, and most of them can be immediately dismissed. It's not going to happen.

I guess Odom, Grant, Butler and a 1st rnd pick was enough. Who'd a thought?

 

[elindholm]

I guess Odom, Grant, Butler and a 1st rnd pick was enough. Who'd a thought?

Not me, obviously. But I had no idea the Lakers would be willing to accept so little. They really let O'Neal call all of the shots.

If they lose Bryant too, Kupchak should resign. It's one thing to lose players, but it's another thing altogether to let them bully you for two weeks -- and then lose them anyway.

 

[George O'Brien]

I'm not shocked. Somehow we lose sight of the fact that forced trades are rarely equal. The T-Mac trade was hardly equal (probably hurt both teams, but whatever), the Charles Barkely trade was unequal, and I'm sure other peopel can give other examples. It is hard to make a trade work when the other side knows you have no choice.

The irony for the Suns was that they lacked enough overpaid players to even think of going after Shaq. Miami sent two of their three overpaid players. For a team like Memphis, they'd have to give up five guys just to match salaries.

 

[fordronken]

I'm not shocked. Somehow we lose sight of the fact that forced trades are rarely equal. The T-Mac trade was hardly equal (probably hurt both teams, but whatever), the Charles Barkely trade was unequal, and I'm sure other peopel can give other examples. It is hard to make a trade work when the other side knows you have no choice.

The irony for the Suns was that they lacked enough overpaid players to even think of going after Shaq. Miami sent two of their three overpaid players. For a team like Memphis, they'd have to give up five guys just to match salaries.

Grant Hill, too. Although...kind of the other way around.