Shaq was asking for too much money and was getting old. Miami are not in a position to a win championship and neither are the lakers. In the process of trading Shaq we got Lamar odom and then Kwame brown later. Both are young and are very talented [Odom is].
Another dumb statement by Melo. Earlier in the year, you were saying that Kobe had no one to pass to, that Lamar Odom was too inconsistent and Kwame Brown was garbage. Now you'd take them over Shaq?
There all inconsistent but Shaq's 33 and is finishing his career soo enough. With another year with Phil jackson, things can only get better.Odom has been consistent since the allstar break and as you have seen i've complelely left him alone.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ELiiiTE @ Apr 28 2006, 12:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Yes. Case closed.</div> Agreed. Look who they probably could of got from Dallas. Steve Nash, etc.
It depends on what the question is asking.If you're asking whether trading Shaq, rather than keeping him and/or trading Kobe, was all that bad, then no, it wasn't. It was the right move.If you're asking whether what the Lakers received in return for Shaq compared to what they could have possibly received was all that bad, then yes.
We know we could get more. I'm not talking about it. I'm saying was getting rid of shaq all that bad?
See one thing you guys dont get... Laker fans have the right to change their minds about players during the season. C'mon Kmart, I thought you knew this...?
The Lakers offered Shaq for Marion and Amare but the Suns declined it. Would u have accepted that trade?
I agree. They could have gotten more for Shaq, or atleast some draft picks or something.The only good part of the trade was Caron Butler, and they screwed that up too.
They did get picks. Two first rounders I think, but obviously not very high ones. Anyways, the trade isn't as bad as some seem to make it, but it still just wasn't worth it.
