ImageImageImageImageImage

No to Brad Miller... then how about SHAQ?

Moderators: j4remi, Deeeez Knicks, NoLayupRule, mpharris36, GONYK, HerSports85, Jeff Van Gully, dakomish23, Capn'O

Luv those Knicks
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 57,756
And1: 4,405
Joined: Jul 21, 2001
Location: East of West and West of East.
Contact:

Re: No to Brad Miller... then how about SHAQ? 

Post#21 » by Luv those Knicks » Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:11 am

ctorres wrote:Hmm, Marbury for Shaq straight up?



That's the idea that seems most probable. Phoenix saves 20 million. NY spends 40 million due to the luxury tax, but they get teh Shaqasaurus, and instant respect, AND, possibly Shaq at 1 million per season in 2010-2011.

No picks need be exchanged and both sides win, provided phoenix wants to call the shaq trade a mistake and move on.
You’ve gotta have Hart
Miles and miles and miles of Hart
Luv those Knicks
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 57,756
And1: 4,405
Joined: Jul 21, 2001
Location: East of West and West of East.
Contact:

Re: No to Brad Miller... then how about SHAQ? 

Post#22 » by Luv those Knicks » Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:14 am

rsavaj wrote:Phoenix would want expirings that were less than Shaq's salary, so I don't think Marbury would work, but if you guys can find a way to make it work, then by all means take the Shaqtus.



In theory, Marbs would accept a buyout at a million under, maybe a little more and that would bring it closer to equal for 2009. NY also has an open roster spot so if phoenix wants to toss in a player with a small salary, it could be Marbs for Shaq plus throw in to even out the salaries for 08/09.
You’ve gotta have Hart
Miles and miles and miles of Hart
4PointPlay
Analyst
Posts: 3,210
And1: 10
Joined: Dec 19, 2004
Location: England

Re: No to Brad Miller... then how about SHAQ? 

Post#23 » by 4PointPlay » Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:14 am

nyk2423 wrote:
4PointPlay wrote:What kind of team would the Suns have then though? Ick.



The players they get from the Amare deal would play big min which isnt that bad because most of them would be young and the Suns would clearly be in rebuilding mode....


I would assume they'd be trading Shaq for 2 reasons. Cap relief, and to make Amare "the man" on offense again. I doubt they'd trade both.
User avatar
drj
Analyst
Posts: 3,257
And1: 71
Joined: Apr 25, 2002
Location: rocking the baby

Re: No to Brad Miller... then how about SHAQ? 

Post#24 » by drj » Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:17 am

I don't see the point to such a short term move.
Now if it was Shaq + Barbosa for Marbury + Curry, then I'd see a point...
4PointPlay
Analyst
Posts: 3,210
And1: 10
Joined: Dec 19, 2004
Location: England

Re: No to Brad Miller... then how about SHAQ? 

Post#25 » by 4PointPlay » Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:18 am

drj wrote:I don't see the point to such a short term move.
Now if it was Shaq + Barbosa for Marbury + Curry, then I'd see a point...


Even Kerr wouldn't do that, Barbosa for Curry? Come on man.
User avatar
NoLayupRule
Forum Mod - Knicks
Forum Mod - Knicks
Posts: 48,019
And1: 10,883
Joined: Dec 06, 2002
Location: Playoffs Fool!
Contact:

Re: No to Brad Miller... then how about SHAQ? 

Post#26 » by NoLayupRule » Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:21 am

how psyched would everyone be if we could move Marbruy and get shaq back. Lolz!!!
kane2021
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 17,005
And1: 6,067
Joined: Oct 03, 2008
Location: It's OK to feel that way. Just sick of hearing about it all the time.

Re: No to Brad Miller... then how about SHAQ? 

Post#27 » by kane2021 » Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:32 am

I love this time of year! The wiretap states he would welcome a deal here. If shaq steps to phx and says he want to come here, then its got to get done. Seems like he was traded there (phx) under the radar. And we have the goods to provide instant cap relief to them. Besides we got marbury from them with penny, that gave them the money for nash. So there is a history of dealings there. Its been so hard as a knick fan last few years. And I dont like shaq. But seeing him put on a show this weekend was great. And this man, love him or hate him, demands respect. For himself and his team. Maybe wishful thinking. But if phx wants to dump salary fast, we can do that again for them.
Image

Never underestimate the strength of knowledge.

Bring back the physical game and send the softies home.
BasicBall
RealGM
Posts: 11,172
And1: 448
Joined: Jul 18, 2003
Location: Harlem USA

Re: No to Brad Miller... then how about SHAQ? 

Post#28 » by BasicBall » Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:33 am

NoLayupRule wrote:how psyched would everyone be if we could move Marbruy and get shaq back. Lolz!!!


That would be GREAT! And on top of that, maybe, just maybe Shaq can get through to Eddy Curry! Maybe actually get him to work out! :D

Damn I will say this, D'Antoni damn sure has changed the image of this team. Folks actually are considering this as a destination....That in itself is a major accomplishment
Don't raise your voice, improve your argument :nod:
User avatar
passthedutchman
Junior
Posts: 268
And1: 0
Joined: Feb 12, 2009

Re: No to Brad Miller... then how about SHAQ? 

Post#29 » by passthedutchman » Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:34 am

rsavaj wrote:Phoenix would want expirings that were less than Shaq's salary, so I don't think Marbury would work, but if you guys can find a way to make it work, then by all means take the Shaqtus.


marbury's salary is actually a little less than shaq's this year, $20.8 million compared to $21 million and then you'd also be shedding a full extra year at $21 million. are they trying to shed enough to get under the luxury tax? I think you'd have to lose about $4-5 million to do that (you're currently around $75-6 million and the tax threshold is about $71.1).

malik, q and roberson works salary wise in the trade checker. saves you $4 million this year which would place you close to getting under the cap, so the total amount saved this year would be $8 million if you count the amount of luxury tax you'd have to pay. you'd also have q's $8.7 million on the books next year but counting the savings this year, you might be able to consider that a wash. I think the only other type of deal that would save more money than this or marbury's would be a straight $17 million expiring.
Image
ezmoney707
General Manager
Posts: 8,031
And1: 2,869
Joined: Jun 21, 2006
     

Re: No to Brad Miller... then how about SHAQ? 

Post#30 » by ezmoney707 » Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:38 am

I think Shaq would definitely help. The man does not lose nor does he like to lose. That's something we have to have in the locker room. We know Shaq is a good leader and we need somebody that will light a fire under some our players a$$ when they f'up.
Esq-4
Veteran
Posts: 2,542
And1: 318
Joined: Dec 05, 2008

Re: No to Brad Miller... then how about SHAQ? 

Post#31 » by Esq-4 » Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:38 am

plus if Marbles was bought out then that would go all that much closer to getting below the tax this season. He should want to try and sign w/ a team to play in the playoffs so the clock is ticking for him on this season.
User avatar
sol537
RealGM
Posts: 13,075
And1: 5,425
Joined: Nov 07, 2001

Re: No to Brad Miller... then how about SHAQ? 

Post#32 » by sol537 » Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:44 am

I made a threat about this a few days ago and some guys said it was stupid. No you're stupid, stupid. Now here's my proposal:

NY Trades: Marbury, Jeffries, and Nate (or Lee)
PHX Trades: Shaq, Barbosa, and Hill

I think we're one of the only teams willing to take on Shaq and give PHX the savings they're looking for and still give them a nice young prospect so Amare and Nash can get back to business.
User avatar
nyk2423
Analyst
Posts: 3,115
And1: 4
Joined: Aug 01, 2006

Re: No to Brad Miller... then how about SHAQ? 

Post#33 » by nyk2423 » Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:59 am

Do you think both sides would do a Marbury, Harrington, Jeffries, Malik, and Nate for Shaq, Jrich, Hill, Tucker, and Amundson??? Me personally as a Knick fan would jump all over that because we get a player in Hill that can really teach Wilson some things, Jrich's value would sky rocket under this system, Shaq is a dominating forced down low that will bring the right attitude towards our locker room. And Amundson and Tucker are just fillers that, even though Amundsom is a pretty nice role player but shouldnt play more than 15-20mpg. The only problem coming our way is that we lose a back up pg even though I think Hill can play point forward for 10mpg.

Duhon
Jrich
Chandler
Lee
Shaq

with Hill,Gallo, and Timmy being the main men off the bench. Again, I notice we wouldnt have a back up pg but Hill can play point forward for 13mpg IMO.But would they??? I am not sure....
User avatar
klemen4
Head Coach
Posts: 7,327
And1: 1,927
Joined: Feb 27, 2005

Re: No to Brad Miller... then how about SHAQ? 

Post#34 » by klemen4 » Tue Feb 17, 2009 1:01 am

Rose, Jeffries, Thomas works

They save only 1,3 mio this year and 7,1 mio next year

Rose, harrington works

They save 4,1 mio this year and 10 mio next year

This idea looks so crazy it could work...if phoenix decides to go with amare and run and gun...
“The only important statistic is the final score.” — Bill Russell
JackKnife2ooo
Senior
Posts: 610
And1: 36
Joined: Jul 04, 2007

Re: No to Brad Miller... then how about SHAQ? 

Post#35 » by JackKnife2ooo » Tue Feb 17, 2009 1:15 am

Shaq would OWN new york media. Period.

The NY post wouldn't know what hit them. He could get Marc Berman fired in a week.
User avatar
StarH2O
General Manager
Posts: 8,902
And1: 40
Joined: Oct 05, 2005
Location: Queens, NY
   

Re: No to Brad Miller... then how about SHAQ? 

Post#36 » by StarH2O » Tue Feb 17, 2009 2:15 am

I love shaq and his comedy. Bring him to NY. :clap:

Maybe he can teach Curry something besides eating.
User avatar
bkknicks19
Rookie
Posts: 1,016
And1: 213
Joined: Feb 03, 2009

Re: No to Brad Miller... then how about SHAQ? 

Post#37 » by bkknicks19 » Tue Feb 17, 2009 2:40 am

I don't understand why ppl would like to rely more on the old legs of the center of the past rather than continuing with younger players who actually fit in the current system? I like shaq but he doesn't fit in this system and if he came here, our offense would pretty much instantly be changed to accomodate him. We are a speedball team and shaq can't run... I would rather take a mediocre center who can run and play some defense in a package that might land us players that can help on more then one front then to take shaq and get nothing else. Malik rose is one our most valuable trade assests and can be packaged with a few other pieces to get players that would be improvements over our current roster without damaging 2010, keeping us competitve and in the hunt for the playoffs this season and become valuable trade assests in the coming seasons. Brad Miller is not our center of the future but he is leaps and bounds better than jared jeffries or eddy curry and plays bettr defense then david lee. Thats an Improvement and we are still able to run with him on the floor. If the knicks can get a player like salmons included in the package by dumping rose and 1 or two other pieces, the knicks instantly improve defensively, retain their offensive punch and stay relatively young. Even if you don't want miller, there are a few other centers out there the knicks should try to get before going after shaq.
User avatar
TdoubleE
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,810
And1: 0
Joined: Jun 28, 2001
Location: Chocolate City

Re: No to Brad Miller... then how about SHAQ? 

Post#38 » by TdoubleE » Tue Feb 17, 2009 2:46 am

Like any other deal, you only do this if Jeffries or Curry is moved. And since Kerr hates Curry, it would have to be Jeffries.

I do have to admit, Shaq in NY for a year would be insane.
cgmw
RealGM
Posts: 22,204
And1: 9,844
Joined: Jul 23, 2003
Location: Winning now since 1973
Contact:
 

Re: No to Brad Miller... then how about SHAQ? 

Post#39 » by cgmw » Tue Feb 17, 2009 3:03 am

JackKnife2ooo wrote:Shaq would OWN new york media. Period.

The NY post wouldn't know what hit them. He could get Marc Berman fired in a week.

Exactly right. You almost have to wonder if the spectacle of Shaq in MSG wouldn't pay for itself in increased ticket sales, merchandise and marketing. If the youth develops, don't underestimate Shaq's ability to lure a top-flight free agent in 2010. I could see him taking the vet's minimum for one year in order to team up with a Lebron or re-up with D-Wade for a championship run in his final season as a pro.

It makes sense.
kane2021
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 17,005
And1: 6,067
Joined: Oct 03, 2008
Location: It's OK to feel that way. Just sick of hearing about it all the time.

Re: No to Brad Miller... then how about SHAQ? 

Post#40 » by kane2021 » Tue Feb 17, 2009 3:10 am

cgmw wrote:
JackKnife2ooo wrote:Shaq would OWN new york media. Period.

The NY post wouldn't know what hit them. He could get Marc Berman fired in a week.

Exactly right. You almost have to wonder if the spectacle of Shaq in MSG wouldn't pay for itself in increased ticket sales, merchandise and marketing. If the youth develops, don't underestimate Shaq's ability to lure a top-flight free agent in 2010. I could see him taking the vet's minimum for one year in order to team up with a Lebron or re-up with D-Wade for a championship run in his final season as a pro.

It makes sense.


Did you see the way he handled craigs question about terry porter sunday night? As I said earlier. Love him or hate him he demands respect. And he is a presence in more ways then one. Its not all about making us better right now. Its about repairing the laughing stock this great franchise has become. To set a example for players, fans, and management. Really, it would be a great move just to begin to restore respect here. And if we are talking marbury for shaq, how could we say no?
Image

Never underestimate the strength of knowledge.

Bring back the physical game and send the softies home.

Return to New York Knicks