Chris Forsberg (ESPN) C's should get Shaq

[Eddie20]

If Shaq wants that $6M for only two years, sign me up all day.  He's still a pretty effective player, not as a starter or for 30 minutes per game, but he's still a guy that can put the ball in the hole and that's an intimidator in the paint.

The only real concern I have with Shaq is that he's very slow on D now, which means that they'd have to play a little differently when he's in the game (not going to be able to switch as much).  That's also going to make him a liability in certain matchups, you don't really want him defending big men who hang around the 3 point line.

For what he would bring to this squad, yeah, I'd take Shaq at 2/$12M.  We seem to be running out of decent wings to acquire using 'Sheed's contract, anyway.

Unless we somehow land Barnes or an equivalent wing, I don't think the Celts can afford to just get Shaq for Sheed's deal.  Something like Sheed's deal, the D-leaguers, Hanrangody and a 1st for Shaq, Moon and Powe/Parker is more what Boston would need.

Mike

I like the Shaq, Parker, and Powe angle. Don't care much for Moon. I rather have Daniels back. He can run the point at times and it'll allow Nate to be more of a scorer.

[the_Bird]

If Shaq wants that $6M for only two years, sign me up all day.  He's still a pretty effective player, not as a starter or for 30 minutes per game, but he's still a guy that can put the ball in the hole and that's an intimidator in the paint.

The only real concern I have with Shaq is that he's very slow on D now, which means that they'd have to play a little differently when he's in the game (not going to be able to switch as much).  That's also going to make him a liability in certain matchups, you don't really want him defending big men who hang around the 3 point line.

For what he would bring to this squad, yeah, I'd take Shaq at 2/$12M.  We seem to be running out of decent wings to acquire using 'Sheed's contract, anyway.

Unless we somehow land Barnes or an equivalent wing, I don't think the Celts can afford to just get Shaq for Sheed's deal.  Something like Sheed's deal, the D-leaguers, Hanrangody and a 1st for Shaq, Moon and Powe/Parker is more what Boston would need.

Mike

Ideally, it would be a S&T that would bring back one of Cleveland's (redundant) wings.  As noted the other day, two birds, one stone.

Barnes, though, is a non-issue for me.  I don't see how signing Matt Barnes makes us any better than if we re-signed Quis.  Barnes doesn't help at the 2, and really the only thing he does OK is shoot the long ball (and even that's not great).

Basically, though, it just seems like all the potential uses for 'Sheed's contract are drying up.  Shaq is still a guy that can win us a few games on his own.  We *really* could have used the big fella against the Lakers, not just because we needed size but because the offense sucked so bad when the game slowed down and the Lakers were playing D.  Be really nice to be able to just get the ball into him down low, and if he gets double-teamed know that he's still a great passer and he'll get the ball to Ray Allen or Paul or KG, whoever's open.  

Shaq can still be a difference-maker.  The other wings that we've been talking about...  not so much.

[Celtics4ever]

Moon is a Cleveland reject, I'd pass on him as well.  They need bodies and they let him walk that should speak volumes about him.

[MBunge]

Barnes, though, is a non-issue for me.  I don't see how signing Matt Barnes makes us any better than if we re-signed Quis.  Barnes doesn't help at the 2, and really the only thing he does OK is shoot the long ball (and even that's not great).

Not to restart a Barnes debate, but here are the stats from last season.

Marquis Daniels - 18.4 minutes a game, 5.6 points, 1.9 rebounds, 1.3 assists.

Matt Barnes - 25.9 minutes a game, 8.8 points, 5.5 rebounds, 1.7 assists.

Quis has also played less than 63 games in 6 of his 7 seasons in the league, while Barnes has played 73 or more games each of the last 4 seasons.  So, they're about the same player, except Barnes is a much better rebounder and is far more durable.

Mike

[Evantime34]

Barnes, though, is a non-issue for me.  I don't see how signing Matt Barnes makes us any better than if we re-signed Quis.  Barnes doesn't help at the 2, and really the only thing he does OK is shoot the long ball (and even that's not great).

Not to restart a Barnes debate, but here are the stats from last season.

Marquis Daniels - 18.4 minutes a game, 5.6 points, 1.9 rebounds, 1.3 assists.

Matt Barnes - 25.9 minutes a game, 8.8 points, 5.5 rebounds, 1.7 assists.

Quis has also played less than 63 games in 6 of his 7 seasons in the league, while Barnes has played 73 or more games each of the last 4 seasons.  So, they're about the same player, except Barnes is a much better rebounder and is far more durable.

Mike

Last season Barnes had better numbers but if you look at career numbers Marquis is better. Also we would have to sign and trade for Barnes where we wouldn't have to give up anything to get Quis.
Barnes is certainly more durable, so I have to include that caveat that Quis is better when healthy (which he hardly ever is).

[the_Bird]

I'd like Quis to grab more boards, but the fact that he's mostly playing the 2/3 (and some PG) whereas Barnes is more of a 3/4 makes a direct comparison difficult. 

I'm kind of liking the idea of Quis playing alongside Nate.  Basically the same thing they tried to do with Eddie House at the beginning of the season (incidentally, while the team was playing very well).  Let Nate play off the ball on offense, and full-court pressure on the PG on D.  Ray or Pierce would likely be in the game, adding another shooter. 

I do tend to think people forget how effective Quis was, even without big numbers or flashy highlights, before he got hurt.  And yes, I know....  he's Quis, he's ALWAYS getting hurt.

Just not worried about losing Barnes.  Don't see him as filling as much of a need since he can't play the 2 guard.

[More Banners]

I'm kind of liking the idea of Quis playing alongside Nate. 

Wow.  I just posted that exact same thing in the resign Quisy pro/con thread.  Another TP for you, sir.

[the_Bird]

I hadn't realized/remembered that Parker was a 40% 3-point shooter.  Only one year left on his deal, too.  Not sure what the incentive would be for them to S&T us Shaq and Parker; what else would they be asking for in addition to 'Sheed's contract?  Big Game Davis?  Bradley? 

That makes it more complicated; 'Sheed and Davis for Shaq and Parker?  Davis WOULD be somewhat redundant with JO, Shaq, KG, and Perk, but I hate to give up the kid now.

[MBz]

I hadn't realized/remembered that Parker was a 40% 3-point shooter.  Only one year left on his deal, too.  Not sure what the incentive would be for them to S&T us Shaq and Parker; what else would they be asking for in addition to 'Sheed's contract?  Big Game Davis?  Bradley? 

That makes it more complicated; 'Sheed and Davis for Shaq and Parker?  Davis WOULD be somewhat redundant with JO, Shaq, KG, and Perk, but I hate to give up the kid now.

Not only that, but to start the season your top 3 bigs have had injury issues the last couple years.  I know Davis has too, but his was something more flukey then old knees.