Shaq may be going to Suns

[kg_veteran]

Originally Posted by chumdawg

The rest of the team isn't going to wear weights on their ankles just because Shaq is on the roster.

You are using a straw-man argument against this concept you have of "Nellie Ball."

True, but what made their fastbreak so lethal was Marion at the 4 and Amare at the 5. Their bigs were able to outrun their counterparts down the floor. Now, that really won't be the case.

Don't be so defensive, Chum. Even the Phoenix writer can see that this is an indictment of the style they've been playing in Phoenix.

[chumdawg]

Originally Posted by FINtastic

A 29 year old Shaq and 29 year old Nash, sure. When both are in their mid 30's? Well....

Everybody uses steroids these days. 35 is the new 29.

[FINtastic]

Originally Posted by chumdawg

If you think that an NBA team--any NBA team--isn't going to figure out how to use Shaquille O'Neal to their benefit...well, then I guess we just aren't on the same page.

If Shaq is not anywhere the guy he used to be, then Phoenix isn't going to benefit. But if he is, they will. That's just pretty simple, the way I see it.

I don't think that at all. Re-read my posts if you like. I said earlier in one of these threads that Phoenix would benefit from a Shaq trade IF they didn't have to give up one of their top 3 players. I don't think the benefit of Shaq outweighs what Marion gave them. Sure, I think they can come up with a system that to an extent makes Shaq work and the team work as best it can. But does that come close to being the system they are running with Marion? I highly doubt it. But this could be a defining moment for your boy, Nash. If he does "make every teammate better" maybe he can find a way to make a traditional system with an aging Shaq as one of the top options work. I'm just not seeing it.

[FINtastic]

Originally Posted by chumdawg

Everybody uses steroids these days. 35 is the new 29.

You better send Shaq the address of the nearest Mexican pharmacy because his career has been going nowhere but downhill since he passed the 30 year old mark.

[kg_veteran]

Originally Posted by chumdawg

35 is the new 29.

As I approach that age, I can only hope so.

[chumdawg]

Originally Posted by kg_veteran

True, but what made their fastbreak so lethal was Marion at the 4 and Amare at the 5. Their bigs were able to outrun their counterparts down the floor. Now, that really won't be the case.

Don't be so defensive, Chum. Even the Phoenix writer can see that this is an indictment of the style they've been playing in Phoenix.

Indictment of the style? I'm saying that even the creators of the style would create it differently if they could have a guy like Shaq or Yao on their team. Guys like Nellie and D'Antoni scrap it out as best they can with what they have. But would they want a Shaq? You're damn right they would! Nellie tried to get a dominant center, in Bradley. That was the best that he could do.

What we are going to see now is exactly what this "style" can do if it has an anchor at the five. I see no reason to dismiss their chances out of hand. Think about the basketball that was being played in the late 80's. Would you have taken your chances with a slow and steady Shaq to go against Kareem and Parrish? A guy like Amare who is Tarpley and Worthy and McHale on steroids? A guy like Nash who can do what Magic did? I'm just sayin'...

[Flacolaco]

[FINtastic]

For what it's worth, Yahoo! is reporting it now:

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_yl...yhoo&type=lgns

[FINtastic]

After the Lakers trade for Gasol, I have to say this makes me feel a lot happier. One team got better, one got worse.

[V2M]

I'm just surprised PHX isn't throwing in a 1st round pick or two... like they do with all their trades!

Seriously though, I think this deal benefits the Suns more in their matchup against the Spurs... and hurts a bit in their matchup against the Mavs.

[Windmill360]

Well, we will now alot sooner than later how the trade works out. Im surprised this all went down so fast. Has this been in the headlines for a while?

[EricaLubarsky]

signing Damp doesnt seem so dumb anymore does it. He's the only guy that can stand up to Shaq 1v1. It looked like we signed Dampier to battle a Lakers team that no longer existed.

[bernardos70]

I think Nash would have been able to guard him much better.

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by V2M

Seriously though, I think this deal benefits the Suns more in their matchup against the Spurs... and hurts a bit in their matchup against the Mavs.

Agreed.

[Underdog]

02/06/08 - #1 seed: Phoenix Suns

04/03/08 - #6 seed: Phoenix Suns

[chumdawg]

What are we going to do about Shaq if we play PHX in the playoffs? The bad news is that Erick Dampier will actually have to play, if we play Phoenix.

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by chumdawg

What are we going to do about Shaq if we play PHX in the playoffs? The bad news is that Erick Dampier will actually have to play, if we play Phoenix.

I don't think that particular matchup will be such a big deal. I don't think Shaq will give Damp/Diop any more problems in the low post than Amare does. Amare tears us up.

The real problem, as KG mentioned, will be that Dirk now has to guard Amare.

[chumdawg]

So, Shaq will give us fits, AND Amare will give us fits? That doesn't look too good.

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by chumdawg

So, Shaq will give us fits, AND Amare will give us fits? That doesn't look too good.

Just Amare. I don't think Shaq will give us fits at all. Damp plays him quite well, generally. Plus, like I said, I'm still thoroughly of the opinion that Shaq is done.

[Dortmund]

Marion for Shaq?! Way to make a bad trade Suns. Thanks.

[chumdawg]

Originally Posted by ProdigyDub

Just Amare. I don't think Shaq will give us fits at all. Damp plays him quite well, generally. Plus, like I said, I'm still thoroughly of the opinion that Shaq is done.

Then why in the hell would would the Mavs have been angling for him, as recent reports suggest?

I think it's time to put down the Mavs-colored-glasses. We are talking about Shaquille O'Neal, for goodness' sakes.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by chumdawg

I think it's time to put down the Mavs-colored-glasses. We are talking about Shaquille O'Neal, for goodness' sakes.

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by chumdawg

Then why in the hell would would the Mavs have been angling for him, as recent reports suggest?

I think it's time to put down the Mavs-colored-glasses. We are talking about Shaquille O'Neal, for goodness' sakes.

Is everything the Mavs front office does correct? You clearly don't think so, having listened to the same 2-3 things you've repeated over and over on this board. Now you're suddenly assuming that they have 100% sound judgment? Which is it?

Just because the Mavs, Suns, or any other team are interested in Shaq doesn't mean he's not done.

[FINtastic]

chum, did you watch the finals a couple of years ago? Damp seemed to have no problem neutralizing Shaq. The Mavs certainly didn't lose that series because of Shaq, I can tell you that much. In fact, that series made me realized just how washed up Shaq was. The fact that Shaq could be taken out of a series by Erick Dampier tells you he was just a shell of his former self at that point. And let me tell you, it hasn't gotten any better for Shaq since then.

[Natte]

Apparently Dallas wanted Shaq first, and the Suns panicked at the sight of a Shaq/Dirk/Josh frontline. Here's the relevant info from Chris Broussard:



My first thought was, "That's ridiculous! There's no way the Suns would trade for Shaq.''

With all due respect to The Diesel, he's just not what he used to be. And he's not worth $40 million over the next two years.

Then I began calling around and speaking with folks in the know. Here's what I was told:

"It's close to a done deal,'' said someone with knowledge of the Suns' thinking.

"I think it's going to happen,'' said someone else with knowledge of the Suns' thinking.

"Why?'' I cried. "I can't see one benefit to adding Shaq.''

Here's what I was told:

First, the Suns don't think they can win it all as currently constructed. Their lack of big, physical players scares the daylights out of them when they look at a Lakers frontline that features Andrew Bynum, Pau Gasol and Lamar Odom (not to mention Ronny Turiaf).

I was told the Suns got word that Dallas was trying to trade for Shaq (in large part to combat the new-look Lakers' behemoth front line) and that that is what set this Phoenix-Miami deal in motion.

Afraid of what a Dallas team that featured Shaq, Dirk and Josh Howard would look like, the Suns have swept in and attempted to steal Shaq from the Mavericks.

I was also told that the locker room chemistry between Shawn Marion and Amare Stoudemire had gotten too negative to bear. No fighting, no yelling, just a bad vibe.

"But financially, it seems disastrous,'' I said.

In actuality, it's not that bad. Marion was owed more than $17 million next year, and he would have been foolish to opt out of that deal because no one else could have or would have paid him that much. Add in Marcus Banks' $4.1 million, and the Suns are actually saving money by paying Shaq $20 million.

Banks has two more years after next at almost $10 million total, so adding Shaq would cost the Suns about $10 million in the long run. That still doesn't jibe with owner Robert Sarver's cost-cutting mandate, but it's not as bad as I first thought.

Basketball-wise, the Suns believe the positives are this:

1. Shaq will give them the big, physical presence they sorely lack on both ends of the floor.

2. Shaq will enable Amare Stoudemire to play his true and preferred position of power forward, which will make Amare more effective, possibly increasing his scoring and rebounding numbers.

3. Steve Nash will make Shaq a bigger scorer than he currently is in Miami because of his ability to create easy baskets for the big fella. Plus, the Suns' 3-point shooting ability will open things up for Shaq inside.

4. The Suns can still run with Shaq because you don't need all five players sprinting upcourt to run a fastbreak.

The Suns aren't completely sold though.

I'm told that Amare wants the deal to happen and spoke extensively with Shaq on the telephone Tuesday night.

I'm told that Nash has some apprehension, but he's weighing the pros and cons. I'm told Coach Mike D'Antoni has even more apprehension, and that there are questions as to whether he can coach the team in a way that will utilize Shaq's abilities.

I'm told new president Steve Kerr thinks adding Shaq is a great opportunity for the Suns organization.

Personally, I wouldn't make this trade if I were the Suns. While they don't look dominant out West, the truth is that nobody looks dominant out West. They are one of four or five teams with a legitimate chance of winning the conference title.

I would give this core of Stoudemire, Nash and Marion one more shot before blowing it up.

While I understand the notion of Shaq adding a big, physical presence, I don't know that you can count on him to do that at his age (he'll turn 36 on March 6).

First, I think he could get in huge foul trouble because of Nash's inability to contain dribble penetration. And secondly, I don't know that Shaq will even be healthy most of the time.

I do like the idea of Dallas adding Shaq because I don't think they'd rely on him as much. I think he'd be a more effective version of Erick Dampier and DeSagana Diop. But I think the Suns will need more out of him than Dallas would.

I think Grant Hill and Boris Diaw can make up for Marion's offense, but defensively, the Suns will miss The Matrix.

I agree that Shaq's presence will make Stoudemire better, and that he will not stop the Suns from running fast breaks. He'll slow down their halfcourt offense, but with all those shooters around him, he should be more effective.

After speaking with these "folks in the know,'' I can see some pluses to adding Shaq to the Suns.

But I still wouldn't do it.

[chumdawg]

Originally Posted by ProdigyDub

Is everything the Mavs front office does correct? You clearly don't think so, having listened to the same 2-3 things you've repeated over and over on this board. Now you're suddenly assuming that they have 100% sound judgment? Which is it?

Just because the Mavs, Suns, or any other team are interested in Shaq doesn't mean he's not done.

Oh, I think they know--just as well as the rest of us do--what would be good for them. Obviously, they aren't any good at all at actually bringing those things to fruition.

And that's pretty much a fact.

[chumdawg]

Originally Posted by FINtastic

chum, did you watch the finals a couple of years ago? Damp seemed to have no problem neutralizing Shaq. The Mavs certainly didn't lose that series because of Shaq, I can tell you that much. In fact, that series made me realized just how washed up Shaq was. The fact that Shaq could be taken out of a series by Erick Dampier tells you he was just a shell of his former self at that point. And let me tell you, it hasn't gotten any better for Shaq since then.

What are you saying, that if the Heat didn't have Shaq in '06 we could have beaten them?

[FINtastic]

Shaq's stats from the 2006 NBA Finals:

Game 1 - 17 points, 7 rebounds
Game 2 - 5 points, 6 rebounds
Game 3 - 16 points, 11 rebounds
Game 4 - 17 points, 13 rebounds
Game 5 - 18 points, 12 rebounds
Game 6 - 9 points, 12 rebounds

Keep in mind, he was averaging 20 and 9 that year and had done pretty well in the previous series against a good Pistons post defense. He never reached his season average in scoring once in that series against Dampier. He did some decent work on the boards, but I guess that isn't too hard when your opponent was throwing up as many bricks as the Mavs threw up that series.

[pkdumas]

The Suns are screwed.

[FINtastic]

I was told the Suns got word that Dallas was trying to trade for Shaq (in large part to combat the new-look Lakers' behemoth front line) and that that is what set this Phoenix-Miami deal in motion.

Afraid of what a Dallas team that featured Shaq, Dirk and Josh Howard would look like, the Suns have swept in and attempted to steal Shaq from the Mavericks.

So there you go chum, it turns out that it was indeed a panic move.

[chumdawg]

Originally Posted by FINtastic

Shaq's stats from the 2006 NBA Finals:

Game 1 - 17 points, 7 rebounds
Game 2 - 5 points, 6 rebounds
Game 3 - 16 points, 11 rebounds
Game 4 - 17 points, 13 rebounds
Game 5 - 18 points, 12 rebounds
Game 6 - 9 points, 12 rebounds

Keep in mind, he was averaging 20 and 9 that year and had done pretty well in the previous series against a good Pistons post defense. He never reached his season average in scoring once in that series against Dampier. He did some decent work on the boards, but I guess that isn't too hard when your opponent was throwing up as many bricks as the Mavs threw up that series.

And now the Suns are going to get that production, while moving Amare back to his natural position.

Beastly.

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by chumdawg

Oh, I think they know--just as well as the rest of us do--what would be good for them. Obviously, they aren't any good at all at actually bringing those things to fruition.

And that's pretty much a fact.

Actually, "fact" is quite an inappropriate word there. Some better options would have been "opinion" or "conjecture."

It's interesting that you pointed out that whoever above was using a "straw-man" argument when all you're doing is engaging in a nice little bit of circular logic. "Phoenix is interested in Shaq because he's good. Shaq is good because Dallas/Phoenix/whoever are interested in him." That's really all you've got on this, and actually I think you did the exact same thing with the Kidd discussion in the other thread.

When arguing that Player X is worth the interest he's getting from teams, you can't use the fact that the teams are interested in him as proof that he's worth it. That assumes the proposition it sets out to prove. The question people want answered is WHY he's worth it.

Where are the facts to back up the assertion that 2008 Shaq is worth a damn? That he's worth more than Shawn Marion, one of the better players in the entire league? The numbers certainly don't lend any credence to that.

Frankly chum, I think all you've got on this particular matter are opinions (justified as you may be in having them) that you stamp as fact. See above.

[Underdog]

I'm told that Nash has some apprehension, but he's weighing the pros and cons. I'm told Coach Mike D'Antoni has even more apprehension, and that there are questions as to whether he can coach the team in a way that will utilize Shaq's abilities.

I wonder who the source was? Common sense?

[FINtastic]

Originally Posted by chumdawg

And now the Suns are going to get that production, while moving Amare back to his natural position.

Beastly.

No, considering that Shaq is putting stats that are roughly 70% of what he put up back then, the Suns are going to get only some of that production.

Semi-beastly.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by ProdigyDub

Actually, "fact" is quite an inappropriate word there. Some better options would have been "opinion" or "conjecture."

It's interesting that you pointed out that whoever above was using a "straw-man" argument when all you're doing is engaging in a nice little bit of circular logic. "Phoenix is interested in Shaq because he's good. Shaq is good because Dallas/Phoenix/whoever are interested in him." That's really all you've got on this, and actually I think you did the exact same thing with the Kidd discussion in the other thread.

When arguing that Player X is worth the interest he's getting from teams, you can't use the fact that the teams are interested in him as proof that he's worth it. That assumes the proposition it sets out to prove. The question people want answered is WHY he's worth it.

Where are the facts to back up the assertion that 2008 Shaq is worth a damn? That he's worth more than Shawn Marion, one of the better players in the entire league? The numbers certainly don't lend any credence to that.

Frankly chum, I think all you've got on this particular matter are opinions (justified as you may be in having them) that you stamp as fact. See above.

You've got it all wrong P-Dub - Chum doesn't argue FOR anything so much as he argues AGAINST the Mavs... (but he still loves this team, even though he never has anything nice to say about them - and if he does, he certainly doesn't share it with us!)

[FINtastic]

Originally Posted by Underdog

I wonder who the source was? Common sense?

Giggle.

[pkdumas]

If the Suns are indeed blowing up the team, maybe they'll send Steve Nash to the Dallas Mavericks. I bet Nash regrets that decision as much as Cuban. Did either of them really need a few extra million? Whatever happened to sticking by your friends. F'in Canadian.

[chumdawg]

As for the Mavs, I was referring to the fact that they have very publicly pursued players (Kidd, Mourning, Garnett, even Shaq) yet never landed any of those players. That is the "fact" that I refer to. If you don't you recall the Kidd and Mourning negotiations, or if you disagree that they pursued Garnett and/or Shaq, then I guess we can't have an intelligent discussion on those points.

I'd respond to the rest of your carefully crafted post, except there is not much to respond to. Either you get the fish you are after, or you don't. I'm saying that the Mavs didn't get the fish they were after. It's up to you, I guess, to determine whether those fish were worth going after.

As for your last point...I'm generally of the opinion that a player is worth what another team will pay for him, no more and no less. So, I see Shaq as being worth Shawn Marion and Markus Banks, no more and no less. Where we differ is on the notion of how that will benefit the respective teams.

And I'm just saying that I have seen Shaq, I have seen my teams go against Shaq, and I know what that guy can do. Probably the last inclination I would ever have would be to laugh at a guy like Shaquille O'Neal.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by chumdawg

Probably the last inclination I would ever have would be to laugh at a guy like Shaquille O'Neal.

I know I already mentioned this, but:

[Natte]

The Suns were competing with a Dallas bid that included Josh Howard to acquire O'Neal.

Source: http://www.azcentral.com/sports/suns...haqonline.html