Reply With Quote
Is this a joke?
This is sure to cause a debate but it's meant to prove a point.
Is this a joke?
Not even close, I can't believe someone actually voted the the proposed shaq trade
Gasol got traded for camel sht.
i would rather the rockets trade Yao for Shaq before that happends!
Besides, all trades have to be approved with the league first, I doubt they would allow for such a nuclear strom like this.
If this happens, I will for the first tiem, consider the Cavs legit.
How is this a joke?
The Cavs get a center that just made the 3rd all NBA team and give up a player who wants to retire and an end of the bench player.
The Lakers get a PF that just made the 3rd all NBA team that's younger than Shaq and slightly better but they give up more: two first round picks, a player Memphis used to re-aquire their 2010 pick, and a center that averaged 12 points and 8 rebounds his rookie season.
Explain how this is a joke. Seems like two trades that are relatively the same in lopsidedness.
Shaq is a of a lot better than Ben Wallace than Pau Gasol is better than Marc Gasol.
Or even than Pau is better than Kwame.
Please explain if you voted Gasol trade.
I voted Shaq trade because they trade an all star center and recieve nothing other than a reduced payroll (mind you they still have no cap room).
Memphis trades a player the fan base was beginning to dislike, a player that wasn't at all happy in Memphis, and got back a rookie that showed a lot of promise toward the end of his rookie season as well as what should be a top 5 pick in a draft scouts are saying is the draft all 30 teams will want picks in.
Pau cause it has helped the Lakers win a le. Plus, he's about 8 years younger.
How does that make it more lopsided?
And Pau is a better player today than Shaq is.
Not possibly having to pay Ben Wallace > Kwame Browns 10 million expiring deal.
Not to mention Shaq is a huge risk. He is a greater injury risk, he could have a steep drop off in production suddenly and the Cavs have a lot riding on next year with Lebron becoming a FA.
Pau was a no-brainer, no risk proposition.
Worst case scenario is Shaq does nothing and they cut him/trade his expiring contract when all they gave up to begin with was a bench warmer and a player who retired?
How is that a risk?
that's crap - Shaq is a proven player as opposed to Pau who was a diamond in the rough. The Lakers FO did their did a lot of scouting to come up with the trade for Gasol.
I'm pretty shocked there are several people that voted for the Shaq trade. Shaq played well last year all things considered, but he's still old as , closer to being done than he is to being a dominant force, at his point a proven cancer and half-a-season rent-a-player, a generally unmotivated fat ass, and a player being phased out by the style of play the league has turned into.
The Gasol trade is more lopsided because the Lakers were getting a guy who was entering or just entered his prime and didn't carry the baggage that Shaq does.
If Shaq had just led the Suns deep into the playoffs, the question might be tougher. But, this past season went a long way in proving that even though Shaq can still put up decent numbers, he can no longer dominate in such a way as to help the team he's on be a le contender.
Last season was the best season Shaq has had since 2005. The Suns sucking had nothing to do with Shaq.
The age really isn't a factor when you consider the fact Gasol would have left Memphis once his contract was up.
I hear ya.
But weren't they saying the same thing about Gasol right around trade time last year?
He was a guy that got swept out of the first round twice and didn't even make the playoffs the year before.
I think you'll at least agree with me if I say he got "rejuvenated" playing alongside Kobe.
All I know is if Shaq does get traded and the Cavs win the finals next year, everybody will be screaming collusion.
Of course it makes perfect sense to both teams.
Your first sentence is evidence to my point. Even playing well, Shaq couldn't dominate to the point of making his team a legit contender. His good play didn't necessarily mean wins. I don't think the Suns "sucked" per se, but the Suns not being as good as they could have been did have a lot to do with Shaq. He forced the Suns to change their style of play. And, that led to not only a coaching and philosophy change that didn't work, but it also forced other players, particularly Amare and Nash to play differently. Shaq was very much a reason why the Suns struggled enough to miss the playoffs.
I'm not sure I quite understand this point. Age does matter when you compare the two players at the time of the trade (or potential trade). Gasol was 27 last year when traded. Shaq is 37. Can you elaborate why age really isn't a factor because Gasol would have left Memphis in another three years anyway?
No they won't. The main reason everyone was screaming collusion with the Gasol trade is cause it came out of nowhere. I'll bet if ESPN talked about a potential Gasol to LA trade for a month prior to the trade and explained Memphis needed to cut payroll, no one would have suspected collusion.
Explain why the team was 2-5 (1-6 if Howard doesn't get injured after scoring 16 first quarter points and getting Orlando a 10 point lead) when Shaq didn't play then.
What would being in Memphis for another three years do for the Grizzlies?
Difference is Shaq was just involved in a trade two NBA seasons ago to specifically do just that for Phoenix. You add all the other factors, such as age, such as style of play, such as Shaq leaving each of his former teams on bad terms, and all of those factors go a long way in showing how Shaq at his age is not that great of an addition to a team at this point in his career.I hear ya.
But weren't they saying the same thing about Gasol right around trade time last year?
He was a guy that got swept out of the first round twice and didn't even make the playoffs the year before.
I think you'll at least agree with me if I say he got "rejuvenated" playing alongside Kobe.
All I know is if Shaq does get traded and the Cavs win the finals next year, everybody will be screaming collusion.
Of course it makes perfect sense to both teams.
Do you understand my point? I said Shaq can't dominate in such a way that it helps his team be a legitimate le contender. However good or bad the team is without him is irrelevant to the point in so much as with Shaq, they weren't le contenders anyway... back to the initial point I argued.
Compare the ages of Gasol and Shaq when they are traded (or in Shaq's case when he is potentially traded to the Cavs this summer). It's not comparing the ages of Gasol last year to Gasol in three years. It's comparing Gasol's age to Shaq's age.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
