I think we're on a collision course with Shaq

[More Banners]

Here's a different thought. If I had my way I'd rather see Sheed return next year than to sign Shaq. He could play very light minutes as he got his back in shape for another playoff run. Then next year when we likely should blow things up we can use his contract to get younger kids with upside. I think Sheed, if healthy, gives you more than Shaq does at this point.

As much as I absolutely hated, hated watching Sheed play last year, I'd take him over Shaq in a game at the Y any day, and wouldn't be in a hurry to trade one for the other.

Truly, I think Shaq will end up somewhere for less than he plans.  Money's starting to dry up.

[Kane3387]

Here's a different thought. If I had my way I'd rather see Sheed return next year than to sign Shaq. He could play very light minutes as he got his back in shape for another playoff run. Then next year when we likely should blow things up we can use his contract to get younger kids with upside. I think Sheed, if healthy, gives you more than Shaq does at this point.

As much as I absolutely hated, hated watching Sheed play last year, I'd take him over Shaq in a game at the Y any day, and wouldn't be in a hurry to trade one for the other.

Truly, I think Shaq will end up somewhere for less than he plans.  Money's starting to dry up.

He will definitely have to settle for less if he wants to win a ring and I truly think the only thing he cares about more than just being able to play is not finishing his career with less rings than kobe.

[nickagneta]

Regarding Shaq's scoring that Mike continues to compare to Perk I think the context has to be looked at differently. When Shaq started and was on the floor with Cleveland, he was their number 2 scoring option.

Uh, in his 53 games last season, Shaq averaged 8.7 shots a game.  In Mo Williams 68 games last season, he averaged 12.5 shots a game.  In Antawn Jamison's 25 games with Cleveland, he averaged over 13 shots a game.

In 53 games, Shaq had 463 field goal attempts.  In 60 games, Delonte West had 436 field goal attempts.  Shaq played 1240 minutes for those 463 FGAs,  JJ Hickson 1691 minutes and had 522 FGAs.

So no, Shaq was not the clearcut #2 scoring option for the Cavs last year.

Mike

I knew you would fall for that trap. Clearly you weren't paying attention. I said when he was in the game he was the #2 option. Of course Jamison and Williams have more shots taken than Shaq, they played 50% or more minutes per game than Shaq.

In the playoffs, Shaq took the second most shots per minutes of any of the starters for the Cavs. He was clearly their second option as LeBron ran the offense from the point forward position and his first look was for a lane, his second look was to shoot and his third look was to feed Shaq.

He was clearly their #2 scoring option when he was in the game and he was a failure at it.

[Roy Hobbs]

He was clearly their #2 scoring option when he was in the game and he was a failure at it.

Define "failure".  52% FG% and 66% FT% isn't bad.

[nickagneta]

He was clearly their #2 scoring option when he was in the game and he was a failure at it.

Define "failure".  52% FG% and 66% FT% isn't bad.

Only able to stay on the court less than 50% of the time because his defense and conditioning was so poor.

His team lost.

He was the worst number 2 option of any #2 option of any team that made it past the first round of the playoffs.

If your efficiency is okay, and for a seven foot plus, 375 lb center who is your team's number 2 option that has an eFG% of 51%, I am being very kind saying "okay", but you can't stay on the floor because your conditioning is so bad and your defense is so bad and because your team actually plays better when you are off the court, to me, that is a failure.

[greg_kite]

He was clearly their #2 scoring option when he was in the game and he was a failure at it.

Define "failure".  52% FG% and 66% FT% isn't bad.

Only able to stay on the court less than 50% of the time because his defense and conditioning was so poor.

His team lost.

He was the worst number 2 option of any #2 option of any team that made it past the first round of the playoffs.

If your efficiency is okay, and for a seven foot plus, 375 lb center who is your team's number 2 option that has an eFG% of 51%, I am being very kind saying "okay", but you can't stay on the floor because your conditioning is so bad and your defense is so bad and because your team actually plays better when you are off the court, to me, that is a failure.

He was the #2 option on the team with the best record in the league.  I'd say that is a success.  It's all about the W's.

[nickagneta]

He was clearly their #2 scoring option when he was in the game and he was a failure at it.

Define "failure".  52% FG% and 66% FT% isn't bad.

Only able to stay on the court less than 50% of the time because his defense and conditioning was so poor.

His team lost.

He was the worst number 2 option of any #2 option of any team that made it past the first round of the playoffs.

If your efficiency is okay, and for a seven foot plus, 375 lb center who is your team's number 2 option that has an eFG% of 51%, I am being very kind saying "okay", but you can't stay on the floor because your conditioning is so bad and your defense is so bad and because your team actually plays better when you are off the court, to me, that is a failure.

He was the #2 option on the team with the best record in the league.  I'd say that is a success.  It's all about the W's.

That didn't make it to the ECFs.

[greg_kite]

He was clearly their #2 scoring option when he was in the game and he was a failure at it.

Define "failure".  52% FG% and 66% FT% isn't bad.

Only able to stay on the court less than 50% of the time because his defense and conditioning was so poor.

His team lost.

He was the worst number 2 option of any #2 option of any team that made it past the first round of the playoffs.

If your efficiency is okay, and for a seven foot plus, 375 lb center who is your team's number 2 option that has an eFG% of 51%, I am being very kind saying "okay", but you can't stay on the floor because your conditioning is so bad and your defense is so bad and because your team actually plays better when you are off the court, to me, that is a failure.

He was the #2 option on the team with the best record in the league.  I'd say that is a success.  It's all about the W's.

That didn't make it to the ECFs.

Because they played the C's who coasted through the regular season.  If the C's played like the should have and Cleveland played Orlando or Atlanta in the second round they would have probably made it to the conference finals.  It wasn't their fault the C's coasted during the regular season.

[nickagneta]

If it's all about the W's then let's be real here.

They didn't win it all. They only won 6 playoff games.

So he failed at doing what he was brought there to do. He didn't get enough W's.

[Roy Hobbs]

I don't get some of the arguments being made here.

Shaq was the second option (?) on a flawed team that couldn't win a championship, so that means he couldn't be a strong fifth option on a team that went to the NBA Finals?

And since when do we fault a guy who played 20 or so minutes per game when his team doesn't win?  Is it Tony Allen's fault that we didn't win a championship last year?

[Mr October]

If it's all about the W's then let's be real here.

They didn't win it all. They only won 6 playoff games.

So he failed at doing what he was brought there to do. He didn't get enough W's.

The C's need another big man to play anywhere from 10-24 minute per game for at least half of the season.

I'm curious, Nick.

If not Shaq, then who? Kwame Brown? I don't know of anyone else of any value who is still out there.

[nickagneta]

I don't get some of the arguments being made here.

Shaq was the second option (?) on a flawed team that couldn't win a championship, so that means he couldn't be a strong fifth option on a team that went to the NBA Finals?

And since when do we fault a guy who played 20 or so minutes per game when his team doesn't win?  Is it Tony Allen's fault that we didn't win a championship last year?

No

What I have been saying is that Shaq is so used to being a 2nd option that he can't be anything but. People want to compare him to our fifth option but if he comes here he won't want to be a fifth option no matter how much lip service he gives you to the contrary.

So why are we going to compare his abilities and performance to Perk who is a fifth option, accepts that he is and fits in seemlessly to that role when we KNOW Shaq won't want to be that type of role player?

An I the only one here that remembers that Shaq and LeBron photos all over ESPN the Mag and Sports Illustrated and other mags? Am I the only one here that remembers all the talk about Shaq going to win one for the King and that he was the best player ever to play with LeBron so finally LeBron would win his title?

Shaq is clueless in regards to being a role player. He forced his will into that Cleveland offense and it was worse off for it. Let's not be so blind to think he wouldn't do the same thing here. So let's not try to confuse the issue by throwing Shaq stats out as comparison's to Perk's without first putting into the context that Perk was the last offensive option his team went to and Shaq was the second.

Shaq will come here and try to be the second and his history last year showed his teamed failed with him in that position.

And that is why all this is being discussed and needs to be discussed.

[Mr October]

I don't get some of the arguments being made here.

Shaq was the second option (?) on a flawed team that couldn't win a championship, so that means he couldn't be a strong fifth option on a team that went to the NBA Finals?

And since when do we fault a guy who played 20 or so minutes per game when his team doesn't win?  Is it Tony Allen's fault that we didn't win a championship last year?

No

What I have been saying is that Shaq is so used to being a 2nd option that he can't be anything but. People want to compare him to our fifth option but if he comes here he won't want to be a fifth option no matter how much lip service he gives you to the contrary.

So why are we going to compare his abilities and performance to Perk who is a fifth option, accepts that he is and fits in seemlessly to that role when we KNOW Shaq won't want to be that type of role player?

An I the only one here that remembers that Shaq and LeBron photos all over ESPN the Mag and Sports Illustrated and other mags? Am I the only one here that remembers all the talk about Shaq going to win one for the King and that he was the best player ever to play with LeBron so finally LeBron would win his title?

Shaq is clueless in regards to being a role player. He forced his will into that Cleveland offense and it was worse off for it. Let's not be so blind to think he wouldn't do the same thing here. So let's not try to confuse the issue by throwing Shaq stats out as comparison's to Perk's without first putting into the context that Perk was the last offensive option his team went to and Shaq was the second.

Shaq will come here and try to be the second and his history last year showed his teamed failed with him in that position.

And that is why all this is being discussed and needs to be discussed.

I thought the Shaq acquisition for Cleveland was just a big bandaid. The parts around Lebron were still not playoff caliber without him.

Shaq had no choice but to be a focal point of that team. The offensive sets in Cleveland were terrible. Doc, Rondo, and the veterans on the Celtics actually know how to run an offense.

I find it hard to compare Cleveland and Boston. If Shaq comes to Boston, the situation will be different. The leadership and team comradery will be different. If you step out of line, the team takes care of business behind closed doors.

I honestly think that Shaq's desire to catch Kobe's ring count will fuel him.

[nickagneta]

If it's all about the W's then let's be real here.

They didn't win it all. They only won 6 playoff games.

So he failed at doing what he was brought there to do. He didn't get enough W's.

The C's need another big man to play anywhere from 10-24 minute per game for at least half of the season.

I'm curious, Nick.

If not Shaq, then who? Kwame Brown? I don't know of anyone else of any value who is still out there.

You don't need a superstar to fill in a role players job. Especially when that superstar is someone who has never and will never accept the role of a role player.

Josh Boone
Kwame Brown
Oleksiy Pecherov
Earl Barron
Etan Thomas
Louis Amundson
Rasho Nesterovic
Fabricio Oberto
Erick Dampier

These names aren't sexy but they are all extremely serviceable 3rd string centers which is the role that the Celtics would be requiring Shaq to play.

Shaq at the minimum and not starting is fine by me. If he accepts that pay rate and his role then the C's win big time in that deal. But the likelihood he accpts that pay or a subservient role are not that good and from that point on, only trouble will exist.

Doc had a horrible year last year keeping that locker room together. Everyone could see that. The last thing he needs is the drama that Shaq would cause because he has to sit because Perk and JO are playing in front of him or because Doc decided to sit him for a game or because Doc got all over him for his defensive rotations.

[Mr October]

If it's all about the W's then let's be real here.

They didn't win it all. They only won 6 playoff games.

So he failed at doing what he was brought there to do. He didn't get enough W's.

The C's need another big man to play anywhere from 10-24 minute per game for at least half of the season.

I'm curious, Nick.

If not Shaq, then who? Kwame Brown? I don't know of anyone else of any value who is still out there.

You don't need a superstar to fill in a role players job. Especially when that superstar is someone who has never and will never accept the role of a role player.

Josh Boone
Kwame Brown
Oleksiy Pecherov
Earl Barron
Etan Thomas
Louis Amundson
Rasho Nesterovic
Fabricio Oberto
Erick Dampier

These names aren't sexy but they are all extremely serviceable 3rd string centers which is the role that the Celtics would be requiring Shaq to play.

Shaq at the minimum and not starting is fine by me. If he accepts that pay rate and his role then the C's win big time in that deal. But the likelihood he accpts that pay or a subservient role are not that good and from that point on, only trouble will exist.

Doc had a horrible year last year keeping that locker room together. Everyone could see that. The last thing he needs is the drama that Shaq would cause because he has to sit because Perk and JO are playing in front of him or because Doc decided to sit him for a game or because Doc got all over him for his defensive rotations.

I definitely hear what you are saying about his strong personality. I trust the starters, Danny and Doc to make the right call on him if they choose to go with or without Shaq.

Thanks for the list. There are still some options there. I think Boone is off the board though.