I think we're on a collision course with Shaq

[kozlodoev]

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?

He was the second option on that team. So that's why he will deservedly get the rap for not being fit for that role.

I don't think there's a person in this thread who will object to having Shaq at the vet minimum playing ~15 minutes a game. Anything more, and he's a liability.

[Who]

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.

Off that list ... I would consider Kwame Brown, Eric Dampier and Louis Amundson as rotation quality players. Rasho Nesterovic is still a serviceable third string center (maybe Etan Thomas too).

Out of the rest ... I'm just as happy working with Erden and Harangody. I don't think any of those other players are upgrades.

[nickagneta]

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.

Off that list ... I would consider Kwame Brown, Eric Dampier and Louis Amundson as rotation quality players. Rasho Nesterovic is still a serviceable third string center (maybe Etan Thomas too).

Out of the rest ... I'm just as happy working with Erden and Harangody. I don't think any of those other players are upgrades.

I agree with that though I like Kwame Brown a whole lot less than you do. I mean world's less.

[Jon]

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?

He was the second option on that team. So that's why he will deservedly get the rap for not being fit for that role.

I don't think there's a person in this thread who will object to having Shaq at the vet minimum playing ~15 minutes a game. Anything more, and he's a liability.

Well make it 20 minutes, and you probably have reality.

And I still don't get this whole notion that Shaq at minimim = Good; Shaq at anything over that = bad. 

Are you guys all secret Celtic owners or something? 

I can understand if we can get something big for Sheed.  But if we can't, who the heck cares if we pay Shaq 1 million or 5 million next year? 

I'd be much more worried about years than dollars. 

[LilRip]

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?

He was the second option on that team. So that's why he will deservedly get the rap for not being fit for that role.

I don't think there's a person in this thread who will object to having Shaq at the vet minimum playing ~15 minutes a game. Anything more, and he's a liability.

Well make it 20 minutes, and you probably have reality.

And I still don't get this whole notion that Shaq at minimim = Good; Shaq at anything over that = bad. 

Are you guys all secret Celtic owners or something? 

I can understand if we can get something big for Sheed.  But if we can't, who the heck cares if we pay Shaq 1 million or 5 million next year? 

I'd be much more worried about years than dollars. 

TP! i was just about to say the exact same thing. the only that matters to us (as fans) are years and Sheed's contract. We have our wing (though hopefully we can still get Rudy) and we need a big. i would trade sheed's contract for Shaq because there's no other better big out there that's available or will be available. I doubt Brook Lopez or Dwight will be available mid-year.

oh yeah, and Kwame Brown really sucks. Those 15mpg matter. that's 31% of the game! and it's easy for some people to blame it on Shaq (who has being defended by one of the league's best post defenders) because that helps their argument but let's not conveniently forget that Jamison couldn't guard KG and Mo couldn't defend RR. Not to mention that LBJ quit on his team. so a lot of things were going against the Cavs.

but to follow your guys' analogy (even though i don't think the Cavs and Celtics are that comparable), if the Cavs had trotted out a lineup of Mo-West-LBJ-Jamison-Kwame... would they have beaten us? i didn't think so either.



- LilRip

[EJPLAYA]

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 agree nick that he would have to accept his role and the money would have to be vet minimum before I wanted him, but stating the 3rd string center is the role we would ask of him isn't right. He would be the second string center if not 1st until the all star break since Perk is out. Then arguably he would still be ahead of Perk the rest of the year due to him likely struggling to get back to where he needs to be to be productive enough to gain his spot. His previous injuries have shown it will take him a while to do that. Considering this is a major knee injury I think it will take even longer.

I would play him ahead of Jermaine so that you could have JO's offense off the bench. He would be able to put up points in a hurry. Shaq would be more content, it would make that starting unit better offensively, and we could make adjustments as needed.

[fairweatherfan06]

If we can get a decent wing with Sheed's contract, I'd just assume sign Josh Boone at the minimum and be done with it.   I doubt Shaq takes the minimum or a bench role, but I think its highly unlikely he does BOTH of those things, but an outside chance he does one of them.

[snively]

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?

He was the second option on that team. So that's why he will deservedly get the rap for not being fit for that role.

I don't think there's a person in this thread who will object to having Shaq at the vet minimum playing ~15 minutes a game. Anything more, and he's a liability.

Who cares about the money as long as ownership is willing to pay it and it doesn't go on for too long?

The only real issue is role. If Shaq is willing to play 20 minutes off the bench, I'd love to have him.  He can be the #1 or #2 option playing with Nate Robinson, Marquis and Von Wafer. 

I'm not as much in love with the idea of him starting.

[nickagneta]

The money matters because the biggest problem with Shaq is going to be if he causes locker room drama and problems. If he starts demanding the ball and causing locker room strife, you can not just cut ties with him because he's costing you $10 million($5 million for his salary, $5 million for his luxury tax). If he is just a bad fit for the team and has to go, that's $10 million.

Now you might not care about writing a $10 million check for a guy that management could believe might be a coaching headache but ownership certainly will. If he comes in at the vet min(a league subsidized contract that the C's are only responsible for $850,000 plus or minus) cutting him if their are problems is a minor thing.

[kozlodoev]

Who cares about the money as long as ownership is willing to pay it and it doesn't go on for too long?

If he costs you more than the veteran minimum, we're also spending another resource on him -- Sheed's contract. So money matters, but not in the way you might think.

[greg_kite]

Who cares about the money as long as ownership is willing to pay it and it doesn't go on for too long?

If he costs you more than the veteran minimum, we're also spending another resource on him -- Sheed's contract. So money matters, but not in the way you might think.

I don't see many options for Sheed's contract at the moment.  The team has decent depth everywhere but the center spot.  The best center available for this team is probably Shaq.  Sheed's contract is most valuable before the season starts, so unless another team suddenly needs to drop a $5-8 million player within a couple of months the asset of Sheed's contract goes away.  After he gets traded he'll probably need to pretend to contemplate playing before retiring so there is no investigation into salary cap circumvention. (is that even a word?)

[BMark]

I'd love to see Shaq here. He wouldn't be my headache, and what fan would care about that (unless he was standing in front of you, yelling in your face)...We need reboudning, period, so I don't care that Shaqwouldn't be out chasing point guards around the perimeter...

[vinnie]

Funny stuff: http://www.theonion.com/articles/several-nba-teams-interested-in-shaq-as-a-person,17818/

[snively]

The money matters because the biggest problem with Shaq is going to be if he causes locker room drama and problems. If he starts demanding the ball and causing locker room strife, you can not just cut ties with him because he's costing you $10 million($5 million for his salary, $5 million for his luxury tax). If he is just a bad fit for the team and has to go, that's $10 million.

Now you might not care about writing a $10 million check for a guy that management could believe might be a coaching headache but ownership certainly will. If he comes in at the vet min(a league subsidized contract that the C's are only responsible for $850,000 plus or minus) cutting him if their are problems is a minor thing.

It's hard for me to see Shaq metastacizing into a locker-room cancer of Starburyan proportions. He was a decent soldier in Cleveland at 23 minutes per game. It's not a much of a leap to see him playing 20 mpg off the bench.

How can you not slobber at the prospect of KG/Perk/JO/Shaq in the playoffs?  All 7 foot or nearly so, all shot-blockers, all tough, all with minute restrictions that allow each other to play big roles.

[kozlodoev]

I don't see many options for Sheed's contract at the moment.

Packaging it with a second-rounder to a team with cap space, thereby creating a trade exception, is always an option. 

The team has decent depth everywhere but the center spot.

The SF position is pretty thin as well, since even though Marquis might be able to fill in there, he's really a 6'6 SG.

The best center available for this team is probably Shaq.

Far from a given.