riehldeal

1. we are going to lose darius miles already due to nash's slap in darius's face

2. even the organization has said that they are going to trade ONE of our PF's and that means zach has not been totally ruled out for being trade bait (and who better to receive in a zach trade than the DIESEL)

3. why have theo at center when you can have shaq!

4. i believe that it was discovered that the numbers cap wise didnt exactly work with the trade as proposed (shaq, zbo miles theo) so that means we had to include others and maybe that meant the lakers as well...my point being maybe we could have gotten a player like kareem rush or devean george (i really like rush and have always remorsed over us passing him over for woods)

maybe a line up of:

damon...telfair
DA...rush
patterson...outlaw...kryhapa
SAR...mid level exception?
shaq...DD

5. last reason to do this deal is that it just flat out puts portland back on the radar for the whole league...diesel in portland!

6. another reason is that now every one is saying that FA's are lining up in Miami to play with shaq, so realistically we could sign a solid PF and back up for cheap just because they want to play with shaq and then still turn aound and trade SAR for other additional help (malone??)

damon...DA...ruben...malone...shaq

7. and i havent done the numbers and how his arrival here would have affected our presumed cap space in 04'-05' but if we maintained our low salary number then shaq would again prove valuable in his recruiting of top FA talent to portland

riehldeal

yes that is a formidable laker lineup BUT; just imagine the *****ing zach would be doing at kobe and darius alittle bit as well....kobe needs role players not emerging stars who want what kobe seemingly has

Dan

__________________
A Buddhist walks up to a hot dog vendor and says "Make me one with everything".

when will the loss of life end?

The world respects the power of our example, not an example of our power.

I'd like to say I made this, but I didn't

Ed O

I don't think that Shaq's any kind of liability... he's a bad free throw shooter, but he's so good everywhere else that his team should be in fewer positions to have his missed free throws matter.

Blaming Shaq for the Finals loss seems strange, considering he scored 26.6 ppg on 63% shooting. Malone was bad (and hurt). Payton was terrible. Payton was terrible.

He was awesome in the Finals. He was awesome in the WC Finals. He was awesome in the second round. He was pretty good in the opening round.

The Pistons had lots more depth and they had the dominant players at the 1 and 4 spots while holding down Kobe.

#1: What short-term success? This team went 41-41 last year and hasn't done anything to improve for this upcoming year.

#2: If we're banking on Miles to be a big part of our long-term success (and I think that many fans on this board are) I think we're going to be disappointed.

I respect people who disagree, of course, but knowing how good Shaq is and seeing how relatively cheaply it seems we could have had him (again, assuming Kahn has good info and Shaq would've wanted to come here)... man.

Ed O.

__________________
"In the end, it all comes down to talent. You can talk all you want about intangibles, I just don't know what that means. Talent makes winners, not intangibles. Can nice guys win? Sure, nice guys can win -- if they're nice guys with a lot of talent. Nice guys with a little talent finish fourth, and nice guys with no talent finish last."

-- Sandy Koufax

Skelton

First off I think Shaq would've HATED to play in Portland. Let's face it, small -market-sunshine challenged-glamorless PDX has to have very little appeal to to a guy like MDE. It would've been a depressing little rental arrangement with a very unhappy ending. Shaq's a fairweather fan.

Second--I couldn't root for a Shaq Fu team that just pounds it in to the Diesel. Although I would enjoy seeing other teams deal with the abject terror of trying to deal with him (ESPECIALLY the Lakers!), he's everything I've hated about today's NBA. He's dominant, but an amazingly blunt instrument with very little refinement. Blechh.

I commend Nash for saying no. I'd rather struggle to make the playoffs than contend with Shaq.

__________________
I worked on this flick...http://www.lastritesthemovie.net/trailer.html

Skelton

You know, a rather odd and slightly perverse thought occurred to me over this Shaq/Blazer thing.

Would bringing in Shaq make Sabas want to return to Portland and win a ring? (As a backup of course)

Would that be cool or just too weird to imagine? If the Blazers could've kept Zach in the trade, it might've made a championship highly likely. But a Shaq McChampionship, nonetheless.

Would that have lured Sabonis back?

__________________
I worked on this flick...http://www.lastritesthemovie.net/trailer.html

barfo

There should be a rule against this sort of thing. No player should be allowed to move directly from LA to Portland, or vice versa. It's like picking up a 70 year old HIV+ prostitute and not using a condom: disgusting and unsanitary.

barfo

Minstrel

Ignoring pyschology issues, like whether Shaq would have been motivated to play well in little ole Portland, the Blazers would have been a considerably superior team if they made that deal.

They could have played out the season. If O'Neal was the dominant center he's been in recent seasons, the Blazers could have endeavoured to re-sign O'Neal and Abdur-Rahim to three-year deals (so they'd both expire together). If he was an umotivated blob, the Blazers could have let both O'Neal and Abdur-Rahim walk, along with Stoudamire, for rather large cap room. Or they could have dealt such expiring contracts to others for valuable players, perhaps.

The Blazers still would have had options, and a better team for the coming season.

__________________
You'll never live like common people
You'll never do what common people do
You'll never fail like common people
You'll never watch your life slide out of view
And dance and drink and screw
Because there's nothing else to do.

CatchNRelease

...those who believe the Blazers would be a better team if this trade happened. That said, there's only a handful of players I like less that Rasheed, and the Big Nostradumass is one of them. I'm glad Nash passed on this one.

Seems to me that this was quite a vote of confidence for Zach, cause I gotta believe that the Blazers would have made the move if they could have subbed SAR for Zach.

Go Blazers

Target

It's amazing that people assume Shaq would be as effective in Portland.

Do you really believe the refs would treat him any better then Sabonis was? It would be worse on Shaq because he'd expect to be able to walk in the lane while getting hacks called. Remember when the Blazers couldn't hit free throws? It would be like Dejanew.

Likely he'd turn into a much bigger angrier technisheed.

Kmurph

I don't think this deal was ever discussed as Kahn says it was. I don't think that Kupchak had ANY interest in trading Shaq to a WC rival. Do you really think they want to see Shaq 4-6 times a year? b\c I sure don 't.

Mark Cuban said that BEFORE any players (or Nowitzki yes/no inclusion) could be discussed in a deal, that Kupchak said there was NO ONE on the DAL roster that he had interest in. Sounds to me like a GM who was bound and determined to trade Shaq out of conference.

As for the deal, tough call. Miles loss is not that big IMO, and trading Theo for Shaq is a no brainer. The real call is Zach for Shaq, but POR has SAR to fill the void, so I would think you would have had to pull the trigger. What you have to look at is that you are trying to win now, at the expense of later. With Shaq you have a 3-4 year window, I think you would have to try it, Shaq is THE most dominating player in the NBA, NO ONE can check the guy, he is an automatic double (sometimes triple) team EVERY night. That means EVERY night you can expect guys to have open looks at the basket. Also, he ATTRACTS FA to him, and he would have in POR too.

I don't think this deal was ever offered, but if it was POR should have taken it, with two caveats. Shaq's willingness to resign (a KEY factor) and the amount and YEARS he wanted to resign for. My guess is he wouldn't want to stay in POR and he WOULD want max dollars and 4-5 years (meaning 90-120 million for 3-4 years).

__________________
Quit the Webster hate

ProudBFan

Only one problem with all that, Minstrel...

...paying both Rahim and Shaq, even for three year deals, flies in the face of "financial responsibility".

PBF

__________________

Crimson the Cat

You guys before you get upset at Nash, there was a key piece left out from the start of this thread.

Nash couldn't get a commitment from O'Neal that he would re-sign.

No way do you do this deal if you're only able to lease Shaq for a season.

__________________
The world is indeed full of peril, and in it there are many dark places; but still there is much that is fair, and though in all lands love is now mingled with grief, it grows perhaps the greater.

Goldmember

Shaq is great and everything but unless you surround him with clutch players (like Kobe, and to a lesser degree Horry, Fisher, etc.) he doesn't win any championships. Would he have that in Portland? I don't think so. Damon is semi-clutch, but that's about it.

This is fools gold. Something that would backfire. I can see the script now: Shaq's Blazers vs. Kobe's Lakers (the Lakers would be damn good after this trade) in the playoffs. The young big-market-playing-league-savior-MJ-hopeful vs Shaq who's already had his run and most fans are sick of...in tiny Portland. The whistles will not blow in big Shaq's favor. I see a lot of offensive fouls and 3 second violations as a lot of small market frustration from the Diesel. The Lakers would once again laugh in our wake with our own beloved Zach, Darius and Theo no less.

Shaq gets fatter every year and I have to believe that that huge body is going to break down quickly.

At first I thought, how could you pass on Shaq?? But after some thought I can understand why. He doesn't gaurantee a title. He didn't win one the last two years with Kobe at his side so how's he going to do it with us?

Then he would probably bail on us in two years and we would have to start from scratch all over again.

No thanks.

Playmaker0017