Even if Mike Kryzewski is hired as the Lakers' next coach, Shaquille O'Neal still wants to be traded, a source close to O'Neal told ESPN's David Aldridge on Friday.According to the source, O'Neal's concerns about the franchise reside at the management level. While he likes and respects Krzyzewski, the Duke coach's hiring (possibly orchestrated by the team in an effort to appease Kobe Bryant) won't change O'Neal posture. O'Neal demanded a trade shortly after the conclusion of the NBA Finals, saying he could no longer play for owner Jerry Buss or general manager Mitch Kupchak and that the team reneged on a promise to give him a contract extension last summer if he "delivered" free agents Karl Malone and Gary Payton. "Unfortunately, it has come to this. But I want the fans to know that it's not me," he told the newspaper. "They said it's about the money. It's not about the money. It's about honesty, and the honesty me and [former Lakers general manager] Jerry West had. That's been gone for four years now ... It ain't about the extension. Of course, that's what they are going to make it out to be."Shaq also referred to the Lakers organization as "fat" and not willing to take the steps necessary to keep winning following consecutive title seasons in 2000, 2001 and 2002. O'Neal reportedly is seeking a two-year extension when his current contract expires in 2006. O'Neal can opt out of his current deal, which will pay him $27 million next season and $30 million in 2005-06, after next season. It's not because Shaq has anything against Coach K. Shaq simply sees his possible hiring as yet another slight, another concession the Lakers have made to Kobe Bryant without Shaq's consultation.With the belief spreading that Krzyzewski is Bryant's hand-picked choice to replace Phil Jackson, Shaq may be even more determined to force a trade, insulted by the appearance of another player on his team being allowed to make all the decisions. Problem is, a Shaq trade is even tougher now than it was when the week began, after the Mavericks lost free-agent point guard Steve Nash to Phoenix without compensation. Dallas and Sacramento are widely considered the only feasible destinations for O'Neal, but the Mavs, without Nash, suddenly don't have a spare star to build a trade package around.The Lakers are insisting on receiving Dirk Nowitzki in any deal that sends Shaq to Dallas. The Mavericks insist they won't trade Nowitzki and were hoping to involve Nash in a sign-and-trade deal with Golden State that would route Warriors free-agent center Erick Dampier to L.A. as Shaq's replacement. That seems impossible now without Nash, and even if the Mavericks were suddenly willing to part with Nowitzki, O'Neal would probably hesistate to commit to a Dallas team without Nowitzki or Nash. O'Neal's wife, Shaunie, appeared on "Extra," , in which she talked about her interest in having her husband traded to the Dallas Mavericks. O'Neal also publicly has expressed an interest in playing for the Sacramento Kings. The Kings, The Mavs, or The Lakers
Anyone have an idea of who would be involved in the Shaq trade with Dallas?? My guess would be: Lakers trade: Shaq Dallas trades: #21 pick(Pavel) Employee #8 Devin Harris(tho they said they were keeping him) Stack I also heard that Golden State might be involved sending Dampier to LA.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting TheGeneral:</div><div class="quote_post">Anyone have an idea of who would be involved in the Shaq trade with Dallas?? My guess would be: Lakers trade: Shaq Dallas trades: #21 pick(Pavel) Employee #8 Devin Harris(tho they said they were keeping him) Stack I also heard that Golden State might be involved sending Dampier to LA.</div> I dont now about that. First, the Lakers will REALLy want Dirk now that Nash wouldnt be invloved in the deal. This is practically putting Sacramento in the #1 spot for a Shaq trade. Also, I'm not sure why GS woud be getting Dampier involved with L.A. , Minnesota is showing a lot of interest in Dampier, and they will give them a good trade for him.
I just don't see why Cuban is so steadfast on Dirk. Dirk is good, but he lacks defense and a consistant ability to creat his own shot. With Shaq you would get much needed defense and the most consistant scorer in the league. That way if you trade Dirk you'll still have enough of the original players from last year to build around and compliment Shaq. Shaq still has a good 5-6 years left. I still think Shaq's young enough to have a team build around him. He is only 32 years old. If Shaq moves to Dallas they will win one Championship at least. If I was Cuban I wouldn't even have to think about it. Shaq's all about winning, thats why he wants out of LA. They are more focused on making Kobe happy then winning. We all know Mark wants to win. Money is no issue with him. Mark just get 'er done
How about this trade? Dallas Sends: Josh Howard Tony Delk Michael Finley Antoine Walker Pavel Podkolzine LA Sends: Rick Fox Shaquille O'Neal New Starting Lineups - Dallas: C - O'Neal PF - Fortson or Free Agent SF - Nowitzki SG - Stackhouse PG - Harris LA: PG - Payton SG - Finley <font size="1">(or if Kobe resigns, then Finley could start at his other position.. SF)</font> SF - Howard or George PF - Walker or Malone <font size="1">(?)</font> C - Podkolzine or Free Agent Dallas is giving up a whole lot in that trade, but if they are really set on getting Shaq and not giving up Nowitzki then they'll end up losing four or five really talented players any way you look at it. A lineup featuring Shaq, Nowitzki, Stackhouse <font size="1">(assuming he recovers from his injuries ok)</font>, and a future star in Devin Harris is arguably better than most of the lineups Los Angeles has during their title runs. I think Los Angeles would do this to make the best of a bad situation. Their team is falling apart, and this may be the best they can do. If they can resign Kobe and have this lineup, then I believe they still have a shot at the title. Payton, Kobe, Finley, Walker, and Malone is one hell of a lineup. Just a thought.
Rick Fox couldn't be part of the trade. Fox has stated emphatically that he will not play for another team, he'd sooner retire. Not that Fox has any trade value anyway.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting TheGeneral:</div><div class="quote_post">Rick Fox couldn't be part of the trade. Fox has stated emphatically that he will not play for another team, he'd sooner retire. Not that Fox has any trade value anyway.</div> Is it up to him though?
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting TheGeneral:</div><div class="quote_post">He said if he was ever traded away from LA he would retire.</div> That would just give cap space to Dallas. That's a non-issue for the Mavericks in my opinion. In that deal, all they need him for is to make the deal work cap-wise.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting TheGeneral:</div><div class="quote_post">I just don't see why Cuban is so steadfast on Dirk. Dirk is good, but he lacks defense and a consistant ability to creat his own shot. With Shaq you would get much needed defense and the most consistant scorer in the league. That way if you trade Dirk you'll still have enough of the original players from last year to build around and compliment Shaq. Shaq still has a good 5-6 years left. I still think Shaq's young enough to have a team build around him. He is only 32 years old. If Shaq moves to Dallas they will win one Championship at least. If I was Cuban I wouldn't even have to think about it. Shaq's all about winning, thats why he wants out of LA. They are more focused on making Kobe happy then winning. We all know Mark wants to win. Money is no issue with him. Mark just get 'er done</div> Shaq has 4 years left at the very best He will likely retire in another 2. Shaq's body is getting worse every year, soon it will just be too much. Shaq is expected to have another 3years, I dont know how he would last another 6.
Man for being so crippled, he still averaged 20, 10, and 3. If he was made the main focus of the offense like he should be, he'd still be a 30, 10, and 3 guy. He may not be as dominant, but he is still capable of playing 5-6 years. He could easily average 35 if he got the ball every time down court. Kobe just doesn't realize that giving it to Shaq more, would get more production from the big fella, but would also open up more things for him offensively. Everyone saw how he was dogged by traps that Detroit put on him. Let that double come as soon as Shaq gets the rock and learn how to move without the ball. Maybe he'd get some easier baskets and they might have a forth ring in five years.
Man if Dallas got Shaq, then you've got Duncan, Shaq and Yao playing in the same state, in the same division... That's nuts.. Teams will dread coming for that 3 game road trip down to Texas. I'm pretty sure the Lakers would rather send him east though. how about : K-Mart (sign and trade) and Kidd to LA Walker and Stackhouse to NY Frank Williams, Kurt Thomas, Othella Harrington and Penny Hardaway to NJ Shaq to Dallas obvious why LA would want to do this trade Isiah Thomas wants Walker, Stackhouse can replace half-season Houston NJ frees up salaries in a couple seasons when Penny's contract expires (Harrington's contract expires at the end of the season), they get a good young PG in Williams and a good PF in Thomas (apparently new ownership wants to get under the cap) Dallas gets Shaq without giving up Dirk
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting TheGeneral:</div><div class="quote_post">I just don't see why Cuban is so steadfast on Dirk....</div> The reason Cuban is holding the line is that he is smart. The Lakers are not dealing from a position of power. If the Mavs had to "lure" Shaq away it would take Dirk, Devin Harris, and more. That isn't the situation. The Lakers must make a move, or live with the consequences. Hold the line Mark, No Dirk for Shaq.
I would be very very surprised if Cuban traded Nowitzki for O'neal. The man did not make his money by being an idiot and that would be a really stupid move. The next problem right now is waiting to see what Bryant is going to do. It will have an impact on what happens to O'neal. If Bryant resigns with LA, O'neal will be traded and they will probably see it as the lesser of two evils. If Bryant signs with another team, there will be no trade and get redy to see the worst two seasons of O'neals career (mostly because he has publicly stated that he no longer wants to play for the current ownership) It does pretty much set the stage that the Kings are the only team that is in a position to make a direct deal with the Lakers and not have to involve other teams or have to trade five players to do it. Send Webber and Christie for O'neal and whoever else they want to package. Webber would not mind being traded to LA. It gives LA a solid PF that knows how to handle the ball and he will be able to play the inside-out game with Bryant very well. Christie will add defense to the Lakers. Sacramento gets an obvious upgrade at the 5 position, allows them to move Miller to the 4 spot and and leaves Divac (perhaps) and Songaila to back them up respectivly. its obvious that the Lakers come out on the short end of the stick with that one. thats not a knock on Webber or Christie. But this is where the decision of going with the lesser of two evils comes in. They may not want to Send O'neal to Sacramento, but they may not have much of a choice. What to pick what to pick... Keep O'neal and piss off Bryant (we already saw how that worked for Phil Jackson) or Trade O'neal, get what you can from it and keep Bryant happy. We have already seen what Buss has decided previously.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting bigknick06:</div><div class="quote_post">Lakers get artest, stackhouse Mavericks get harrington Shaq Pacers get Nowitski</div> that still involves Nowitzki leaving the Mavs which Cuban says will not happen.
The only 2 possible spots I see Shaq going to next season are the Lakers or the Mavs...the Mavs would have to give up a lot of talent for a 32 year old center who's stats are going slightly downhill...All I'm saying is don't be surprised if Shaq is in a Laker uniform next season...With his contract there are only a couple of teams that can afford him...The Mavs, Kings, or Warriors are all options...Also this is off topic but we are trying to get a game together...check the link in my signture...
If the Mavs are going to get Shaq they are going to have to give up Nowitski no matter what cuban says
The real reason Cuban wouldn't want to get rid of Nowitski: If you trade Dirk for Shaq, what do the Mavericks have? Shaq and...and.. Shaq and not much of anyone else, Nash is gone now too. Shaq would be on that team by himself. I think that the point was to get Shaq and Dirk together so they could be a big duo. That was the hype at the begining of this speculation, a Shaq and Nowitski duo. If the Mavs gave up Nowitski for Shaq, the Mavs would be worse than they were before the trade, right? Nowitski, Nash and a few others for Shaq? Is that worth it?
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Voodoo Child:</div><div class="quote_post">How about this trade? Dallas Sends: Josh Howard Tony Delk Michael Finley Antoine Walker Pavel Podkolzine LA Sends: Rick Fox Shaquille O'Neal New Starting Lineups - Dallas: C - O'Neal PF - Fortson or Free Agent SF - Nowitzki SG - Stackhouse PG - Harris LA: PG - Payton SG - Finley <font size="1">(or if Kobe resigns, then Finley could start at his other position.. SF)</font> SF - Howard or George PF - Walker or Malone <font size="1">(?)</font> C - Podkolzine or Free Agent .</div> C- Oneal PF- Nowitzki SF- Stackhouse SG- Daniels PG- Harris If this is the trade, no matter what, Daniels will start.
