Shaq Signs with the Celts (Official per Celtics.com; Report: 2 years, $2.8 mil)

[MBunge]

Who is this guy you speak of? Is he available, and for the vet minimum?

I am tired of people who never bothered to even check who is available, yet feel compelled to try to convince me that Shaq some sort of alternativeless signing.

Brown, Oberto, Barron, Nesterovic, and even Thomas and Skinner are available at this point and will likely end up signing veteran minimum deals. They can give you solid 15 minutes. Probably can't give you anything more, but any attempt to get anything more than 15 minutes from Shaq will probably be a bad idea.

In short, anyone who thinks Shaq is some sort of exponential improvement in overall contribution to those guys just because he will score a handful of buckets is delirious, or hasn't watched him in the last 3 years.

Thomas is not bad and Barron had an incredible 7 game run with New York, but he's 29 years old and has played a grand total of 89 games in the NBA.  The others...?

Last Season Stats

Oberto - 1.5 pts, 1.8 boards
Nesterovic - 3.9 pts, 2.1 boards
Skinner - 1.6, pts, 1.7 boards
Brown - 3.3 pts, 3.7 boards

When you start talking up crappy players who could barely get off the bench for crappy teams, it's time to rethink your anti-Shaq jihad.

You must be a prominent fantasy basketball player. All I see from you is stats, stats, stats, and then some more stats. In case you failed to notice, I don't think the Celtics' primary need is someone who can put together a given stat line. It is someone who can play a role.

The reason why the Celtics are a great team rather than a bunch of stars is because the management did an excellent job in finding players that address specific needs.

I've never played any fantasy sports in my life and I don't actually think stats are the end all, be all of understanding sports.  But for pete's sake, you are so bone-headedly contrary to any and all data or evidence on the subject of Shaq that repeating the revelent stats is important so everyone else can fully understand how irrational you are about this.

You subjectively don't think Shaq is a good fit for the team.  We get it.  But when you start talking up non-entities like Oberto or Skinner as being better additions than Shaq, you've moved beyond subjective opinion and into foaming at the mouth lunacy.

Mike

[Kuberski33]

Am wondering how much watching that Laker series motivated Shaq to do this?  I bet it did.

[Jon]

Good signing...it's that simple.

[Drucci]

I was against signing Shaq at first because he has been a chemistry killer over the past few years, on his last teams (L.A, Miami and Phoenix) but he didn't cause any locker room trouble in Cleveland so...

The more I think about it, the more I'm excited about Shaq joining the team. I was concerned about his ego and the role he would want to play on the team but since he has agreed to the veteran minimum, and presumably a backup role, it shows that he has accepted his limitations and will not get out of his new role. He is now a complementary player and he seems to have accepted it, I can't wait to hear what he says in his press conference.

I like Shaq's personality off the court, although he did a cheap shot to Nash by stealing his TV show idea...

Anyway, I still don't like the fact that Shaq's pick & roll defense will be atrocious and that he is not much of a defender, but I'm really excited to see that the team finally has a really good "replacement" center in Perk's absence, and, most importantly, and finally, the low post presence we've badly lacked these past 3 years!

It will be awesome to have Shaq as an option to score in the paint with his post up moves when our offense is going south and we can't score anymore. It should really help us and open up the perimeter too. I really like the offensive game/dimension Shaq will bring to the team, and I hope Rondo and the other guys will cover his defensive weaknesses.

And, although he is 38 years old and the other guys are old too (or recovering from an injury), a frontcourt of KG/J.O/Perk/Baby and Shaq will be HUGE! Miami's thin frontcourt will get exposed and crushed big time.

Plus, we still have Sheed's contract to trade for a scoring wing or a guy like Shane Battier... awesome trade chip (I was against using Sheed's contract to get Shaq).

[Jon]

Exactly.  If he wasn't a locker room killer in Cleveland, he won't be here.  LeBron was great; however, Shaq had a case that he was the Cavs second best scoring option last year (I'm not saying 100% agree, but there's merits to that argument).  You could go even further and say that he SHOULD have demanded the ball more. 

Here, it's different.  There are at least 4 All Star quality players on the team (and maybe a 5th if JO comes around).  There's no shame in being the 5th leading scorer with those guys.

And let's also remember, we're not Phoenix.  We don't have a fastbreak game for Shaq to kill. 

[Roy Hobbs]

Shaq isn't a perfect player at this stage, but for the minimum he's a no-brainer.  Shaq brings legit size, post scoring, post defense, rebounding on both ends, and above-average passing.

If we'd had Shaq in the Finals, we'd be NBA Champions right now.

[Kuberski33]

Shaq isn't a perfect player at this stage, but for the minimum he's a no-brainer.  Shaq brings legit size, post scoring, post defense, rebounding on both ends, and above-average passing.

If we'd had Shaq in the Finals, we'd be NBA Champions right now.

If the C's play the Lakers in Finals again, we'll be glad Shaq's there.  Bynum, before the knee slowed him down was overpowering Perk.  Won't happen with Shaq.

[kozlodoev]

He can finish well inside.

He can. He's also useless when he's not inside, which is a problem, because it makes our top two offensive options (Rondo and Pierce) less efficient.

There is a reason those guys all have low numbers. It's because they aren't good enough to get on the court.

Mo Williams had great numbers before getting to Cleveland. He's not that good, either. Posey, on the other had, had pretty pedestrian numbers on all teams he played for, and yet was a vital cog in our championship squad.

I agree that numbers aren't everything but when the disparity between points and rebounds is that great that really makes things clear.

Which "things"? The only thing that matter is who best fits our team needs. The options are clear: a not very mobile, heavy center who is no longer good enough to be a top offensive option, or a less flashy, career reserve type of guy who may be mobile enough to fit a system that requires a lot of adjustments from big men.

[MBunge]

The only thing that matter is who best fits our team needs.

Size, rebouding and low post scoring are obvious needs for this Celtic team.  And anyone who thinks Brian Skinner or Fabricio Oberto would be better pick ups than Shaq, needs to stop pretending he cares about meeting team needs.

Mike

[35Lewis]

Shaq isn't a perfect player at this stage, but for the minimum he's a no-brainer.  Shaq brings legit size, post scoring, post defense, rebounding on both ends, and above-average passing.

If we'd had Shaq in the Finals, we'd be NBA Champions right now.

I agree.  Danny seems to locate the weak link in his aging championship team every year to make sure the same thing doesn't happen the next year.  The Rasheed signing was in case KG was hurt because that is what held us back the year before.  This year it is the Oneal twins.

I only wish he was forecasting instead of using historical analysis because it could be something completely different this year.  I will say that I love that he doesn't panic and rip the team apart as some would have him do...he 'tweaks'

[kozlodoev]

I've never played any fantasy sports in my life and I don't actually think stats are the end all, be all of understanding sports.  But for pete's sake, you are so bone-headedly contrary to any and all data or evidence on the subject of Shaq that repeating the revelent stats is important so everyone else can fully understand how irrational you are about this.

The problem is that a bunch of stats do not count as evidence.

You subjectively don't think Shaq is a good fit for the team.  We get it.  But when you start talking up non-entities like Oberto or Skinner as being better additions than Shaq, you've moved beyond subjective opinion and into foaming at the mouth lunacy.

I didn't realize our 15 mpg backup needs to be an entity -- I must have been focusing too much on team needs.

As I have said before, I have no problem in Shaq at the veteran minimum for 15 mpg, if he's going not going to be a distraction. He's unlikely to hurt us much, and the only resource sunk in acquiring  him is a roster spot.

What I don't get is the way in which the blog falls head over heels over this signing. Shaq is not the difference maker he was, not at this stage of his career. And if the Celtics try to adjust everything that worked so great since 2007 to accomodate 20 mpg for Shaq, we'll crash and burn in the playoffs. That's it.

Oh, and to use your own arguments -- the "non-entity" Fabricio Oberto started 60+ games on a 56-win San Antonio team in 2008.

[Mencius]

anyone who is against this signing has to be ignorant to the team's needs

Anyone who is FOR that signing is ignorant to the team's needs.

Shaq, at this point, is a specialist.  Against, centers who never leave the paint, he'll be especially effective, which is exactly the case with Howard and Bynum.

[MBunge]

I didn't realize our 15 mpg backup needs to be an entity -- I must have been focusing too much on team needs.

See, this is what I mean.  Perk is out for most of the year, you certainly don't want KG to play more minutes next season and Jermaine O'Neal played only 28 minutes a game last season and has played less that 51 games in 6 out of the last 7 seasons.  The Celtic back-up center is going to have to play much more than 15 minutes a game next season, yet you CONSTANTLY refer to the C's back-up center being a 10 to 15 mpg player because only by diminishing the contributions needed from that position can you make ridiculous arguements like Brian Freakin' Skinner being a better choice than Shaq.

Mike

[manl_lui]

Exactly.  If he wasn't a locker room killer in Cleveland, he won't be here.  LeBron was great; however, Shaq had a case that he was the Cavs second best scoring option last year (I'm not saying 100% agree, but there's merits to that argument).  You could go even further and say that he SHOULD have demanded the ball more. 

Here, it's different.  There are at least 4 All Star quality players on the team (and maybe a 5th if JO comes around).  There's no shame in being the 5th leading scorer with those guys.

And let's also remember, we're not Phoenix.  We don't have a fastbreak game for Shaq to kill. 

exactly, we havent seen a fastbreak dunk much these past 2 season, with KG injured 08-09 and coming back from injury this season, he hasn't really been running much, for starters i only see rondo and ray and pierce running but its not like its a fast "fastbreak"

hopefully we can see more fast break this year with KG coming back 1 year after injury, his legs should be fresh now...

i expect JO to contribute more than he did in Miami

[The Walker Wiggle]

As I have said before, I have no problem in Shaq at the veteran minimum for 15 mpg, if he's going not going to be a distraction. He's unlikely to hurt us much, and the only resource sunk in acquiring  him is a roster spot.

What I don't get is the way in which the blog falls head over heels over this signing. Shaq is not the difference maker he was, not at this stage of his career. And if the Celtics try to adjust everything that worked so great since 2007 to accomodate 20 mpg for Shaq, we'll crash and burn in the playoffs. That's it.

Oh, and to use your own arguments -- the "non-entity" Fabricio Oberto started 60+ games on a 56-win San Antonio team in 2008.

I agree with Kozlodev on all points, and will get even more pessimistic in arguing, that there's no evidence that Shaq will be happy as a second, or third string center getting limited touches. Unlike Oberto for example or Skinner.

He's worn out his welcome in four cities, even on winning, seasoned teams. And in his last two stops - Cleveland and Phoenix - both teams failed to meet expectations and were better without him.

I'm also surprised that so many have forgotten how well Glen Davis acquitted himself as the team's back up center during the 2008-2009 season. (62 wins.) I was hoping he was in line for more minutes, not fewer.