Shaq wants to be a Celtic

[the_Bird]

Is anyone concerned by the fact that the Cavs/Suns were noticeably worse on the floor when Shaq was playing? and by the fact that he's burned bridges with almost every team that he's played with? That he has a history of sulking when things aren't going his way? That he has no lift/athleticism/can't hit free throws? Yes, he can still rebound and occasionally score in the low post. He'd be a great big man to have for 15-20 minutes a game. But would he be happy with only playing that?

I can't prove, but I believe from all that I've heard and read that Shaq's a smart guy who understands his basketball mortality.  I think he'd fit right into the team's culture and would play that role - 15-20MPG (maybe closer to 25 until Perk returns) very well and without complaint.  I believe that he understands he is no longer a starter, but can be a valuable contributor.

Cavs were better with Varejao on the court, but Varejao's a pretty [dang] good player.  Hell, I'd *rather* take Sideshow off Cleveland's hands, but they don't seem interested in a fire sale.

Even with his limitations, Shaq gives us what we need; size, rebounding, and an inside presence.  I have concerns about the defensive side, but think he would be pretty good at  least against Dwight Howard (Howard ain't muscling for low-post position on Shaq any easier than he does on Perk).

EDITS:  Wouldn't be advocating for Shaq if Doc has walked.  I have more confidence in Doc Rivers to keep Shaq happy - within the context of what the team needs.  He's dealt pretty successfully with the biggest egos in the league.

Was Shaq complaining about touches and playing time in Cleveland and I missed it?  I just can't remember hearing anything Iverson-esq

[OmarSekou]

Shaq is not a good fit for this team. Our team is built around chemistry and hard work. Shaq is the anti-thesis of Ubuntu. The Heat went after Big Z and not Shaq.

Could he potentially be a great fit for us if he was willing to play for less money, limited minutes, and in a backup role (on the court and in the locker room)? Yes.

But all those things go against what Shaq has always been. It's like saying: "we should go after Iverson, everyone's doubting him and with his abilities we could make him into a great defensive pest and distributor off the bench..." It's possible on paper, but in no way realistic. I feel the same way about Shaq.

In spurts, he can still dominate anyone in the league. But...He doesn't run well. He doesn't play well without the ball. He gets gassed. He has a huge ego. He's known for not being in shape. He's known for bringing in unnecessary media attention. And he's several years removed from being a factor in the league. We don't need him.

[Mike-Dub]

Could you have ever imagined 15 years ago when the day would come that Shaq said he WANTED to play for the Celtics?

I'd get this done...  He wants to be here and there's no doubt that Shaq will do what needs to be done to make the dollar amount work.  We really need him...  He's limited now, but funny enough, he's probably better than Perk...

Shaq is nowhere near better than a healthy Perk!

Ahhh, the caveat!!!

This could be correct but if we sign Shaq to a one year vet minimum contract, my guess is next year, Shaq will be WAYYYYYYYYY better than Perk. Why? Shaq will be healthy and Perk may never be next year.

I do agree with that.  Hopefully Perk will get back to close to 100% healthy next season, but idk if that's going to happen.

[Mike-Dub]

Is anyone concerned by the fact that the Cavs/Suns were noticeably worse on the floor when Shaq was playing? and by the fact that he's burned bridges with almost every team that he's played with? That he has a history of sulking when things aren't going his way? That he has no lift/athleticism/can't hit free throws? Yes, he can still rebound and occasionally score in the low post. He'd be a great big man to have for 15-20 minutes a game. But would he be happy with only playing that?

TP4U. And this is why I say he would be okay for the minimum because if any of the bad stuff starts coming out, release him. What do you lose?

That's exactly how I feel myself.  I want Shaq only for the minimum.

[Eddie20]

Is anyone concerned by the fact that the Cavs/Suns were noticeably worse on the floor when Shaq was playing? and by the fact that he's burned bridges with almost every team that he's played with? That he has a history of sulking when things aren't going his way? That he has no lift/athleticism/can't hit free throws? Yes, he can still rebound and occasionally score in the low post. He'd be a great big man to have for 15-20 minutes a game. But would he be happy with only playing that?

TP4U. And this is why I say he would be okay for the minimum because if any of the bad stuff starts coming out, release him. What do you lose?

That's exactly how I feel myself.  I want Shaq only for the minimum.

The Cavs and Suns were also teams that were better suited and thrived in an uptempo system. Not exactly the best fit for Shaq. Shaq not playing heavy minutes, being in a better system for him, surrounded by good shooters, and with a chip on his shoulder after being shunned by teams in free agency is a combination I am eager to see.

[bdm860]

Is anyone concerned by the fact that the Cavs/Suns were noticeably worse on the floor when Shaq was playing? and by the fact that he's burned bridges with almost every team that he's played with? That he has a history of sulking when things aren't going his way? That he has no lift/athleticism/can't hit free throws? Yes, he can still rebound and occasionally score in the low post. He'd be a great big man to have for 15-20 minutes a game. But would he be happy with only playing that?

Cavs weren't worse (in my opinion)
Suns were (but that's because they play the complete opposite style).

I don't think he's burned bridges with his last 2 teams (Cavs and Suns) unless I'm missing/forgetting something.  To me, this helps maybe show that he is more accepting of the fact he's not the man anymore = less of a primadona now.

What backup Center has the combination of lift/athleticism/can hit free throws/score and rebound that you're looking for?

Phoenix purposely played him like every other game his first season there, and he was ok with that (or just sat him the 2nd night of back-to-backs, something like that).  And he played only 23 minutes a game for Cleveland.  I think he knows he's not superman anymore and is on his way down.

If I were Danny, I would call the Big 3 and Doc, ask their opinions, if they want him, I'd get him. If not, end of story. (Not that I let a players/coaches dictate moves, but I would always confer with them especially on bigger moves/personalities/question marks).  Just remember we're talking about a backup center who we'll probably get less than 1000 minutes from.  Expectations shouldn't be too high.

[LilRip]

i would take Shaq but not at the expense of Sheed's contract. if we have to include Sheed's contract though, i think we'd need to get a wing from Cleveland or a 3rd team. i wouldn't mind giving up picks to make this work.

honestly, Shaq has declined so much BUT! he has size. and a hobbled Bynum showed us in the Finals how size can still change the game.



- LilRip

[bdm860]

And if Shaq comes off the bench, we'd finally have a go to option on the 2nd unit.


Edit - Eh, now that I think about it, we have Nate for scoring on the 2nd unit now too.  Don't know how well a 2nd unit of Nate and Shaq would mix.  If Nate is Donkey, and Baby is Shrek, who the heck is Shaq?

[FatjohnReturns]

It would be better to sign Shaq for the vet minimum. If the money numbers dont pan out. Ill throw in the Rasheed contract for Diesel but Cleveland should include Delonte in the deal.

Shaq sign and trade plus Delonte for Rasheeds expiring and cash.

[WeMadeIt17]

And if Shaq comes off the bench, we'd finally have a go to option on the 2nd unit.


Edit - Eh, now that I think about it, we have Nate for scoring on the 2nd unit now too.  Don't know how well a 2nd unit of Nate and Shaq would mix.  If Nate is Donkey, and Baby is Shrek, who the heck is Shaq?

The fat puss and boots from the latest sherk lol!

[nickagneta]

 If Nate is Donkey, and Baby is Shrek, who the heck is Shaq?

Dragon!!!

[thirstyboots18]

If they were looking for Shaq to be a starter, I would be against the signing.  But they are not.  Shaq will be a second or even third option and he is surely good enough, experienced enough and big enough to do that.  He is intimidating in the paint, and that is what we need.  He can still score and rebound and cause havoc under the basket.  I don't believe he will  be a problem to team chemistry.  He wants to go out a champion, and if he signs with the Celts I hope he does.  Laker v. Celtics will be awesome.  Celtics v. Miami will be awesome.   

[Mike-Dub]

 If Nate is Donkey, and Baby is Shrek, who the heck is Shaq?

Dragon!!!

TP ! 

[LooseCannon]

Is there a way to S &T Shaq for about 3 million a year (not comfortable with having him at more than that) to Cleveland and create a trade exception we can use then to get another wing Fernandez or whomever?  At the minimum I like the deal but there's no wings on Cleveland that I'd be interested in taking Shaq in a S&T with. 

It should be possible, since Cleveland has a huge trade exception from the LeBron S&T, but it will cost more.  If you could S&T Shaq for Sheed plus a couple of second round picks, it might be Sheed plus a first and second round pick to get a sizable trade exception that Ainge isn't guaranteed to be able to use.

Also, remember that a S&T has to be for a three-year contract, although only the first must be guaranteed.  I think Shaq will want, at a minimum, two years guaranteed, probably with at least partial guarantee for year 3.

Before you start proposing trades to grab wings from Cleveland, you might want to figure out who they will be starting at small forward.

I do not believe this is possible. A trade exception can only be traded for a whole player and can not make up only a portion of a players salary. So in trading Rasheed to Cleveland for a sign and trade for Shaq, you can not make up the difference in Sheed's salary by using a trade exception. Sheed's entire salary can be traded for an exception or for players but not both.

It should be possible if you structure it as two trades.

Boston trades Sheed to Cleveland for a draft pick and a trade exemption.

Boston then sends part of that trade exemption (you can split a trade exemption), plus draft picks, perhaps including the one sent for Sheed, back to Cleveland, for Shaq.

Capology is fun.

[Witch-King]

I found this old article about Glen Davis where he and Shaq confirm that Davis beat Shaq at wrestling when he was fifteen years old:

http://www.boston.com/sports/basketball/celtics/articles/2009/03/04/baby_steps/

^(skip to the bottom of page 2 for the Shaq story)

Both Glen Davis and Shaquille O'Neal are former LSU 'bigs', and if Glen Davis is 'Big Baby' that would make Shaquille O'Neal 'The Godfather'.



...if you forget for a moment that Glen Davis injured Shaq's thumb during this past regular season then it would seem that the two have a bit of a friendly rivalry having known each other for so long. I'm pretty sure something like that would translate positively to the basketball court -- Shaq could continue to be Davis' mentor and the Celtics would have a ridiculous line-up no matter who was on the floor because Jermaine O'Neal and Perkins would have to step it up as well or risk being eclipsed by Davis and Shaq.

Meanwhile, the Big 3 would just be dominating -- Kevin could continue to use his jumper instead of getting banged around in the paint. Shaq is exceptionally good at kicking the ball out for a three, so Pierce would be getting easier looks, Rondo would continue to distribute the ball while working on his own offensive game, Ray would be chasing the all-time 3 point record/just being Ray, and Nate Rob would continue to add some valuable bench scoring. All we would need from Jermaine O'Neal and Perkins is good defense, rebounding and maybe a post play here or there, or a feed from Rondo for a close-range look.