Shaq Might Still Sign With Atlanta

[Rondo_is_better]

If Atlanta did sign Shaq, it would be a fitting end to their off-season.

"okay guys so we overpaid our #1 guy...we didn't bring back Childress...lets get Shaq so we can stop running and clog the lane."

"Nice. Nice."

[MBunge]

I'm not sure what all the Shaq infatuation is.  He's waaaay past his prime.  I would much rather have a young, athletic type defender/rebounder that will sign for the vet min rather than wasting Sheed's contract on Shaq.

The problem is that young athletic rebounder types get signed to big deals.

Look at Amir Johnson!

At this point I would be all over Louis Amundson before I would even think of Shaq.

His Per36 numbers last year 11.4 points, 10.7 rebounds, 2.3 blocks 0,9 steals shooting 55% from the field. Need a backup center for 10-15 minutes that can rebound and block shots, there's your guy.

Putting his theoretical stats aside, Amundson averaged 4.7 pts and 4.4 rebs in 14.8 minutes in the regular season, 2.9 pts and 3.5 rebs in 12.1 minutes in the playoffs.  He's also just 6'9'' and was clearly outmatched by the Laker bigs in the halfcourt during their playoff series.

His is only 28 and appears to be a pretty energetic and aggressive player, so he might be a good fit with Nate, TA and Davis.

Mike

Theoretical? How else are you suppose to gauge a bench players stats unless it's by a per minute basis? I guess I could have put down his per minute stats but they are meaningless in interpretation, hence why people use PER36, PER40 and PER48 metrics.

Your buddy Shaq had PER36 numbers of 18.5 points, 10.3 rebounds, 1.8 blocks and shot 56%. In just about every category except scoring, Amundson was more productive on the court on a per minute basis than Shaq at 1/20th the price.

He's a great role player for short money. And yes he's 6'9" but he has a 7' wingspan and a good vertical leap. I don't expect wonders from the man but I would expect 15 MPG, excellent rebounding, good defense, good shot blocking, and some great garbageman scoring, especially of offensive boards. And I don't see that this team needs much more than that right now.

One way you judge a bench player is by what keeps him on the bench.  If Amundson is so darn productive, why wasn't he playing 36 minutes a game instead of having to fantasize about what he might do with that time on the court?

Secondly, when comparing him to Shaq on PER 36 numbers, they have basically the same rebounding rate, Shaq has a better shooting percentage and much better scoring, Amundson has better shot blocking.  The difference is that Shaq HAS ACTUALLY PRODUCED AT THOSE LEVELS WHILE AMUNDSON NEVER HAS.  I emphasize because a guy who's actually done something is different than a guy who might do something.

Amundson also doesn't spread the almighty court, was physically outmatched by the Laker bigs in the playoffs and since Ainge is clearly not going to give Shaq 6 to 8 million to sign, the two players will end up being paid pretty much the same if they come to Boston. At most Shaq might get two or three times the vet min Amundson would receive.

And by the way, until Perk comes back and perhaps even after that, Boston's back up center in going to have to play significantly more than 10 to 15 minutes a game.

Mike

And the difference is that Amundson would come in and give this team what it needs while putting his ego at the door and making zero demands and causing zero locker room drama. The has been formerly known as Shaq carries so much baggage and demands that it just is not worth having him come into a situation where he has to play a role.

He's never done it. It is not in his nature not to be the star. It's not in his nature to keep his mouth shut and do what he is supposed to do no matter how menial the task. You get role players like Amundson and Brad Miller and Lamar Odom and Jared Dudley and Chris Anderson because they know how to play a role with as little griping and bemoaning and demands as possible and they give you specific skills without all the drama and demands that ex-stars, like Iverson and Shaq and McGrady come with. They are reliable and dependable.

Shaq for all the stats you throw out is a drama queen, attention seeking, egomaniac and the last thing Doc needs after having to babysit Rasheed Wallace all last year is more BS in the clubhouse coming from a 15-20 MPG role playing bench player.

You just do not seem to get this!!!

What I get is that you just don't like Shaq and no evidence or argument to the contrary is going to penetrate your brain.  If you'd just admit that up front instead of pretending you have intelligent reasons for your anti-Shaq view, you'd save everybody a lot of time and trouble.

As I've said before, if Shaq wants to start I want no part of him in Boston.  But if he'd be willing to come off the bench, there's only a handful of available players that could give the Celtics more.  And Louis Amundson ain't one of them.

Mike

[greg683x]

anybody else think that Shaq was using the Celtics to sway the Hawks instead of vice versa like everyone was saying earlier?

also, using the Clippers/Lakers analogy in regards to comparing the Celtics and Hawks as contenders is ludicrous.  The Hawks still might not have a team that can win it all, but theyre still a team the Celtics should not take lightly.  The Hawks have never been an easy out for this C's team, even when they were at their best.  No one here can really say we would have been able to beat Atlanta if we played them in the playoffs last year.

[nickagneta]

I'm not sure what all the Shaq infatuation is.  He's waaaay past his prime.  I would much rather have a young, athletic type defender/rebounder that will sign for the vet min rather than wasting Sheed's contract on Shaq.

The problem is that young athletic rebounder types get signed to big deals.

Look at Amir Johnson!

At this point I would be all over Louis Amundson before I would even think of Shaq.

His Per36 numbers last year 11.4 points, 10.7 rebounds, 2.3 blocks 0,9 steals shooting 55% from the field. Need a backup center for 10-15 minutes that can rebound and block shots, there's your guy.

Putting his theoretical stats aside, Amundson averaged 4.7 pts and 4.4 rebs in 14.8 minutes in the regular season, 2.9 pts and 3.5 rebs in 12.1 minutes in the playoffs.  He's also just 6'9'' and was clearly outmatched by the Laker bigs in the halfcourt during their playoff series.

His is only 28 and appears to be a pretty energetic and aggressive player, so he might be a good fit with Nate, TA and Davis.

Mike

Theoretical? How else are you suppose to gauge a bench players stats unless it's by a per minute basis? I guess I could have put down his per minute stats but they are meaningless in interpretation, hence why people use PER36, PER40 and PER48 metrics.

Your buddy Shaq had PER36 numbers of 18.5 points, 10.3 rebounds, 1.8 blocks and shot 56%. In just about every category except scoring, Amundson was more productive on the court on a per minute basis than Shaq at 1/20th the price.

He's a great role player for short money. And yes he's 6'9" but he has a 7' wingspan and a good vertical leap. I don't expect wonders from the man but I would expect 15 MPG, excellent rebounding, good defense, good shot blocking, and some great garbageman scoring, especially of offensive boards. And I don't see that this team needs much more than that right now.

One way you judge a bench player is by what keeps him on the bench.  If Amundson is so darn productive, why wasn't he playing 36 minutes a game instead of having to fantasize about what he might do with that time on the court?

Secondly, when comparing him to Shaq on PER 36 numbers, they have basically the same rebounding rate, Shaq has a better shooting percentage and much better scoring, Amundson has better shot blocking.  The difference is that Shaq HAS ACTUALLY PRODUCED AT THOSE LEVELS WHILE AMUNDSON NEVER HAS.  I emphasize because a guy who's actually done something is different than a guy who might do something.

Amundson also doesn't spread the almighty court, was physically outmatched by the Laker bigs in the playoffs and since Ainge is clearly not going to give Shaq 6 to 8 million to sign, the two players will end up being paid pretty much the same if they come to Boston. At most Shaq might get two or three times the vet min Amundson would receive.

And by the way, until Perk comes back and perhaps even after that, Boston's back up center in going to have to play significantly more than 10 to 15 minutes a game.

Mike

And the difference is that Amundson would come in and give this team what it needs while putting his ego at the door and making zero demands and causing zero locker room drama. The has been formerly known as Shaq carries so much baggage and demands that it just is not worth having him come into a situation where he has to play a role.

He's never done it. It is not in his nature not to be the star. It's not in his nature to keep his mouth shut and do what he is supposed to do no matter how menial the task. You get role players like Amundson and Brad Miller and Lamar Odom and Jared Dudley and Chris Anderson because they know how to play a role with as little griping and bemoaning and demands as possible and they give you specific skills without all the drama and demands that ex-stars, like Iverson and Shaq and McGrady come with. They are reliable and dependable.

Shaq for all the stats you throw out is a drama queen, attention seeking, egomaniac and the last thing Doc needs after having to babysit Rasheed Wallace all last year is more BS in the clubhouse coming from a 15-20 MPG role playing bench player.

You just do not seem to get this!!!

What I get is that you just don't like Shaq and no evidence or argument to the contrary is going to penetrate your brain.  If you'd just admit that up front instead of pretending you have intelligent reasons for your anti-Shaq view, you'd save everybody a lot of time and trouble.

As I've said before, if Shaq wants to start I want no part of him in Boston.  But if he'd be willing to come off the bench, there's only a handful of available players that could give the Celtics more.  And Louis Amundson ain't one of them.

Mike

I have no problem with Shaq. 5-10 years ago when he could back up his act with superstar play, he is the first guy I would have wanted on my team. The man was DOMINANT!!!. Huge. Quick on his feet for someone his size. Long. And talented beyond belief.

His cockiness and personality was a part of the package and he backed everything up with championship play. MJ and Magic and Bird were very similar. I liked them and respected them too.

But Shaq should have retired two years ago and walked away with his legacy in place. He's not a role player. He never will be a role player. He's not going to come off the bench and he's not going to change his personality or demeanor to suit a team. For those reasons, he does not belong here.

I actually feel bad for him that at this point he's almost down to begging for work as he really did believe he was worth $8 million a year for multiple years to start and play 25 or more minutes for a contender. Superstars of his caliber should just learn to hang them up and go out on top. Unfortunately, I think he's going to end his career much like Moses Malone, running here and there begging for work, trying to make things be like they were and being a bigger setback to his team than an asset.

[MBunge]

anybody else think that Shaq was using the Celtics to sway the Hawks instead of vice versa like everyone was saying earlier?

That's entirely possible and would prove that Shaq's eqo is overriding his brain.

If he goes to Atlanta, Shaq can be a starter and gets another chance to pretend to be the guy that'll bring home a title.

But if he comes to Boston, Shaq will get to play the way he wants to play.  He'll still only play 20some minutes, but for most of that time he'll be the focus of the offense and get all the touches and shots he wants, while generally being less challenged defensively.

Mike

[MBunge]

But Shaq should have retired two years ago and walked away with his legacy in place. He's not a role player. He never will be a role player. He's not going to come off the bench and he's not going to change his personality or demeanor to suit a team. For those reasons, he does not belong here.

You sound like the people who said there was no way KG, Ray and Paul would work together because none of them would adjust to getting fewer touches and fewer shots.  Or the people who would have laughed at you 4 years ago if you said Paul Pierce was going to become a significantly better defender after years of being indifferent toward defense.

Mike

[Snakehead]

anybody else think that Shaq was using the Celtics to sway the Hawks instead of vice versa like everyone was saying earlier?

That's entirely possible and would prove that Shaq's eqo is overriding his brain.

If he goes to Atlanta, Shaq can be a starter and gets another chance to pretend to be the guy that'll bring home a title.

But if he comes to Boston, Shaq will get to play the way he wants to play.  He'll still only play 20some minutes, but for most of that time he'll be the focus of the offense and get all the touches and shots he wants, while generally being less challenged defensively.

Mike

If Shaq is ever the "focus of the offense" then I will hate watching the Celtics play (in a hypothetical situation where we sign Shaq)

Unless he is willing to be a role player, no thank you.  The idea of Shaq on your team and the reality of what it does to you defense, offense, chemistry, etc are much different things.  No thanks.

But Shaq should have retired two years ago and walked away with his legacy in place. He's not a role player. He never will be a role player. He's not going to come off the bench and he's not going to change his personality or demeanor to suit a team. For those reasons, he does not belong here.

You sound like the people who said there was no way KG, Ray and Paul would work together because none of them would adjust to getting fewer touches and fewer shots.  Or the people who would have laughed at you 4 years ago if you said Paul Pierce was going to become a significantly better defender after years of being indifferent toward defense.

Mike

Lol not even a good comparison.  The big three were in the twilight of their primes coming together and are all stand up guys (also coming together all at once would require a sudden and drastic shift in how you all play and an acceptance of that fact, while coming into a situation alone late in the game would not).  Shaq has proven selfish over the last few years, apparently still wants to start, and is older than the big three were coming together.  That's a big time stretch to make that comparison.

[nickagneta]

But if he comes to Boston, Shaq will get to play the way he wants to play.  He'll still only play 20some minutes, but for most of that time he'll be the focus of the offense and get all the touches and shots he wants, while generally being less challenged defensively.

Mike

So it's your belief that if Shaq comes to Boston that for the time he is in there, Doc Rivers would change his entire offensive strategy of ball movement and finding the open man for a Shaquille O'Neal focused offense where Shaq can get the ball all the time and put up as many shots as he wants and be able to do little on defense because all the other guys will pick up the slack??

That's really what you think??

Tell me you're joking!!~!~!

[Tradetime]

anybody else think that Shaq was using the Celtics to sway the Hawks instead of vice versa like everyone was saying earlier?

also, using the Clippers/Lakers analogy in regards to comparing the Celtics and Hawks as contenders is ludicrous.  The Hawks still might not have a team that can win it all, but theyre still a team the Celtics should not take lightly.  The Hawks have never been an easy out for this C's team, even when they were at their best.  No one here can really say we would have been able to beat Atlanta if we played them in the playoffs last year.

And why might that have been the case? Remembering the '08 playoffs, Al Horford had a coming out party against us, grabbing rebounds like a beast and destroying us inside.

And now, we have the opportunity to pick up a guy like Shaq to help Jermaine defend the post as a legit 7 footer. Hmmmm...

[Snakehead]

anybody else think that Shaq was using the Celtics to sway the Hawks instead of vice versa like everyone was saying earlier?

also, using the Clippers/Lakers analogy in regards to comparing the Celtics and Hawks as contenders is ludicrous.  The Hawks still might not have a team that can win it all, but theyre still a team the Celtics should not take lightly.  The Hawks have never been an easy out for this C's team, even when they were at their best.  No one here can really say we would have been able to beat Atlanta if we played them in the playoffs last year.

And why might that have been the case? Remembering the '08 playoffs, Al Horford had a coming out party against us, grabbing rebounds like a beast and destroying us inside.

And now, we have the opportunity to pick up a guy like Shaq to help Jermaine defend the post as a legit 7 footer. Hmmmm...

Al Horford is not a real C.  He knows it and ATL knows it.  He's been pleading for a real C to play alongside to the media during the offseason.  He wants to move to the PF position.

And his team's play would prove that, looking at how they fared against Dwight Howard.  He absolutely ate them for lunch.  They could use a body to match up against him, and Shaq is that.

[Tradetime]

I'm not sure what all the Shaq infatuation is.  He's waaaay past his prime.  I would much rather have a young, athletic type defender/rebounder that will sign for the vet min rather than wasting Sheed's contract on Shaq.

The problem is that young athletic rebounder types get signed to big deals.

Look at Amir Johnson!

At this point I would be all over Louis Amundson before I would even think of Shaq.

His Per36 numbers last year 11.4 points, 10.7 rebounds, 2.3 blocks 0,9 steals shooting 55% from the field. Need a backup center for 10-15 minutes that can rebound and block shots, there's your guy.

I would dare say that Amundson was a victim of "Nash-itis." Remember how good Quentin Richardson, Shawn Marion and Boris Diaw looked playing alongside Nash? How well are they fairing now?

Channing Frye is even getting to look like a star after years of looking like a bust in NY/Portland.

[MBunge]

But if he comes to Boston, Shaq will get to play the way he wants to play.  He'll still only play 20some minutes, but for most of that time he'll be the focus of the offense and get all the touches and shots he wants, while generally being less challenged defensively.

Mike

So it's your belief that if Shaq comes to Boston that for the time he is in there, Doc Rivers would change his entire offensive strategy of ball movement and finding the open man for a Shaquille O'Neal focused offense where Shaq can get the ball all the time and put up as many shots as he wants and be able to do little on defense because all the other guys will pick up the slack??

That's really what you think??

Tell me you're joking!!~!~!

What did we constantly complain about last season?  Sheed not posting up.  What have we all wished KG would do more of?  Post up and demand the ball.  What do we all agree Jermaine O'Neal will bring to the starting line up?  A legitimate post up game.

If your second unit is Nate Robinson, Marquis Daniels, Glen Davis, a wing player to be named later and Shaq...why wouldn't you want to run the offense through Shaq?  He can score for himself and draw defenders to open up jumpers and lanes to the basket for everyone else.

And by less challenged defensively I obviously mean that Shaq coming off the bench will spend more time having to defend less talented and less skilled bench players.

Actually try and think about this stuff.

Mike

[Birdbrain]

anybody else think that Shaq was using the Celtics to sway the Hawks instead of vice versa like everyone was saying earlier?

also, using the Clippers/Lakers analogy in regards to comparing the Celtics and Hawks as contenders is ludicrous.  The Hawks still might not have a team that can win it all, but theyre still a team the Celtics should not take lightly.  The Hawks have never been an easy out for this C's team, even when they were at their best.  No one here can really say we would have been able to beat Atlanta if we played them in the playoffs last year.

I don't think Shaq is smart enough to do that in first place.  He wants to go to a team that will pay him the most money but, isn't a bottom feeder.

One series they played boston well and now they are we struggle against them.. never mind they got beat by 40 in 4 straight games to team we beat in last years playoffs.

Good call.

[Birdbrain]

I'm just saying that being top 50 means that you may be the second, if not the third best rebounder on your team. I guessr he qualitative evaluation of this statement is in the eye of the beholder, though your clustering argument makes sense.

Not to me.  Neither Perkins or Amir Johnson are 'good' rebounders.  If 4 rebounds a game is considered good what the heck is bad?

Save your minutes per rebound stat because if that really meant anything he would play 35 min and average 50 rebounds a game, fyi.  He's a below average NBA player that lucked out that no one wants to play in Canada.

[BballTim]

Because Perkins and Johnson rank in the top 50 in the league. Thats not bad at all.

Just for perspective, if you're the 50th best rebounders in the league, this means that on average, every team has 1-2 rebounders that are better than you. That's not too good.

So to be a rebounder you have to be in the top 30? That doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. If you're top 30 you're elite, if you're top 50 you're just good.

Perkins was 33rd Johnson was 41st, so on average its better to say they'd be the second best rebounder on their team, that's not bad either. Especially when you look at the spread of rebound rates. There are 6 above 20, 1 at 19, 8 in 18s, and then it clusters around 17 and 16s.

  Perk's rebounding rate puts him 33rd in the league. His defensive rebounding rate is 21st. His offensive rate is pretty low but Doc wanted the guys to run back on defense and not crash the offensive glass. If you consider that there's a total of 60 starting pf/c in the league, 33rd overall would be no worse than average, and 21st (DRR) would be in the top 1/3.