Welcome Shaq!
- Thread starter John Galt
- Start date
Castasic
G-League
Brick, I usually love the insight you bring but in this case you are sounding really bad. I don't really have any feelings one way or the other on Shaq being involved. I just know that we cant dwell on the past too long. Things change and we as Kings fans will just have to accept that.
Sac.1989
Starter
the past defines who we are today and I totally get where brick is coming from. Some wounds never dam heal and this is one of them. The only good that can come from this is the perceived PR we will get now because of who shaq is, his role on tnt and the potential that he might pull demarcus into line and assist his growth. The latter is a possibility but it remains just that, a possibility. Correct me if im wrong but didn't boogie say shaq didn't contact him when he publically mentioned he'd love to mentor him. the kid was more of less waiting by the phone for this perceived great center to come unload some wisdom on him, never happened. How short your memories are, (link below)
I would have been happier if we hired a great big man simply to more or less shadow and mentor boogie. Pay whatever it is, that's where our future glory lies. Could have been webber. Should have been webber.
ya'll cant sit here and tell me that your all whole heartedly 100% digging this. Theres apart of you that's like ahh joy, shaq, right **** just got real, the circus is back.
Theres a right way to do business. Indiana, OKC go about things quietly. This is Sacto not dam Miami. We need to re-establish how we do things, this whole big name continuation and GS link is not our way. Don't kid yourself into buying in. Im not bitter about how far we have come since the Maloof days. I just seriously question how we are going about things and it just doesn't sit right with me.
http://www.cbssports.com/nba/eye-on...ousins-still-hasnt-heard-from-shaquille-oneal
I would have been happier if we hired a great big man simply to more or less shadow and mentor boogie. Pay whatever it is, that's where our future glory lies. Could have been webber. Should have been webber.
ya'll cant sit here and tell me that your all whole heartedly 100% digging this. Theres apart of you that's like ahh joy, shaq, right **** just got real, the circus is back.
Theres a right way to do business. Indiana, OKC go about things quietly. This is Sacto not dam Miami. We need to re-establish how we do things, this whole big name continuation and GS link is not our way. Don't kid yourself into buying in. Im not bitter about how far we have come since the Maloof days. I just seriously question how we are going about things and it just doesn't sit right with me.
http://www.cbssports.com/nba/eye-on...ousins-still-hasnt-heard-from-shaquille-oneal
Last edited by a moderator:
Guess that's part of the problem with having very good business minds? Vivek has openly stated that he has very big plans for the Kings and the NBA. His NBA 3.0 vision and what have you. You don't exactly achieve making the Kings/ NBA more internationally known by "going about things quietly".
As far as Webber goes, he's the best thing that has happened to the Sac Kings thus far, but dang he is one arrogant person. I've never heard him admit that he was wrong about anything, it's always someone else's fault and never his. And in that regard I too wonder whether he's just bitter about not being successful in purchasing the Kings. I believe that had he shown interest in buying a share of the Kings that he would certainly have been taken on.
Personally my hatred for the Laker players has weened over the years. Kobe and Shaq have gone on to win 3 more championships combined and here we are still dawdling along. If bringing Shaq in raises the profile of the team and contributes to making us a more attractive FA destination (as a result of increased media coverage combined with us (hopefully) being an up and coming team) then I'm all for it and I couldn't care less about his past "relationship" with the team. I'm far far more concerned with the player and FO personnel we have on the team that much more directly affects how good we are going to be. The mentoring thing is a bonus, and to be frank I share the opinion that Shaq's not going to do very much in that regard after 1-2 weeks. He's always been going around, saying he'd make whichever young player was on his new team the best.
Padrino
All-Star
i'm moderately indifferent to this news. it mostly strikes me as the kind of distraction that a new regime would use to drum up fan support as we close in on training camp and the preseason. but it has little to do with the action that will take place on the court, and i remain unconvinced that shaq will represent the kind of mentor/teacher/confidante that demarcus cousins truly needs...
in my opinion, this publicity stunt does quite a bit more for shaq than it does for the kings. it's fairly well-known across the league that shaq has his sights set on a future front-office gig, and he needs to continue to bolster his resume in order to make that a reality. that said, the new ownership group is certainly proving to be an opportunistic bunch. shaq's celebrity and quotability will undoubtedly shine a brighter spotlight on sacramento. his profile could have an impact on future acquisitions, though i doubt it. this is still sacramento, and the kings are still coming off seven straight losing seasons. and again, the spotlight-factor probably serves shaq more than it does the kings. if things go well here, he gets another little gold star on his post-playing-days resume, though he will likely have had little in the way of practical, tangible impact on the rebuilding of this franchise...
i don't feel as strongly about the kings' past associations with shaq as brick does. i'm one who maintains that the kings collapsed in game 7 just as convincingly as the referees collapsed in game 6. it was a heated rivalry, and the kings allowed the petty mindgames that shaq and phil were playing to get inside of their heads. that team should have made it to the finals, but they didn't have the mental composure to overcome a dynasty. and i'm fine with that...
it still stings, to be sure, but we're talking about hall of famers here. phil jackson. shaquille o'neal. kobe bryant. woe to those who lack the perspective to recognize just how difficult it is to go toe-to-toe with a dynasty of those particular proportions. i mean, ****, there's a reason that the houston rockets' only two championships as a franchise came in 1994 and 1995, in michael jordan's absence from the league. sometimes all you can do is pray that the GOATs will get out of your way a bit. frankly, the kings of the early 00's ran into a brick wall, and unfortunately, none of jackson, o'neal, or bryant decided to step away from the game in order to play baseball while the kings were making their run...
now, shaq may still be a bit of a moron, and he may have allowed his size to do much more work on the court than his ethic, but professional basketball has been and will continue to be about athletes who are blessed with tremendous physical gifts. just look at the landscape of the nba today. do any of you see a physical specimen like shaq truly dominating out there? i don't. the center position is evaporating, and there's not a GM across the league who wouldn't kill for a big with even half of shaq's dominance. it's why teams are so willing to swing-and-miss on guys like greg oden and andrew bynum...
that said, it's silly to me to see people pretending like shaq skated to greatness entirely due to his size. it's an incomplete argument. example: for his career, shaq shot 53% from the free throw line. in the infamous game 6 against sacramento, he shot 13-17, for 77%. in the ensuing game 7, he shot 11-15, for 73%. shaq stepped up in two very close, very competitive playoff games. in game 6, the kings shot a mediocre 72% from the free throw line as a team. in game 7, the kings shot a horrifying 53% from the free throw line as a team. even despite this poor team free throw shooting, the kings would have won the series had shaq only hit his average from the free throw line. but shaq stepped up instead, while the kings folded. greatness often rears its head in such moments...
beyond that, shaq wasn't tangling with the smallball centers of today when he was in his prime. the league was still BIG while he was playing, it was tremendously competitive at the PF and C positions, and he was still dominating. as for his part in the kings-lakers rivalry of old, i can understand the tension that results for a given fan. he was the enemy, and now we're expected to accept him with open arms. to me, it does feel a bit like a bothersome hangnail, but nothing more. i simply expect the entirety of the new regime to build a winner. if shaq gets some of the credit for that, then so be it. i'm not too proud to say that i want to watch a winning kings team again, and that has to happen on the court, where shaq's influence as a minority owner will be just as inconsequential as the percentage of his stake in the team...
in my opinion, this publicity stunt does quite a bit more for shaq than it does for the kings. it's fairly well-known across the league that shaq has his sights set on a future front-office gig, and he needs to continue to bolster his resume in order to make that a reality. that said, the new ownership group is certainly proving to be an opportunistic bunch. shaq's celebrity and quotability will undoubtedly shine a brighter spotlight on sacramento. his profile could have an impact on future acquisitions, though i doubt it. this is still sacramento, and the kings are still coming off seven straight losing seasons. and again, the spotlight-factor probably serves shaq more than it does the kings. if things go well here, he gets another little gold star on his post-playing-days resume, though he will likely have had little in the way of practical, tangible impact on the rebuilding of this franchise...
i don't feel as strongly about the kings' past associations with shaq as brick does. i'm one who maintains that the kings collapsed in game 7 just as convincingly as the referees collapsed in game 6. it was a heated rivalry, and the kings allowed the petty mindgames that shaq and phil were playing to get inside of their heads. that team should have made it to the finals, but they didn't have the mental composure to overcome a dynasty. and i'm fine with that...
it still stings, to be sure, but we're talking about hall of famers here. phil jackson. shaquille o'neal. kobe bryant. woe to those who lack the perspective to recognize just how difficult it is to go toe-to-toe with a dynasty of those particular proportions. i mean, ****, there's a reason that the houston rockets' only two championships as a franchise came in 1994 and 1995, in michael jordan's absence from the league. sometimes all you can do is pray that the GOATs will get out of your way a bit. frankly, the kings of the early 00's ran into a brick wall, and unfortunately, none of jackson, o'neal, or bryant decided to step away from the game in order to play baseball while the kings were making their run...
now, shaq may still be a bit of a moron, and he may have allowed his size to do much more work on the court than his ethic, but professional basketball has been and will continue to be about athletes who are blessed with tremendous physical gifts. just look at the landscape of the nba today. do any of you see a physical specimen like shaq truly dominating out there? i don't. the center position is evaporating, and there's not a GM across the league who wouldn't kill for a big with even half of shaq's dominance. it's why teams are so willing to swing-and-miss on guys like greg oden and andrew bynum...
that said, it's silly to me to see people pretending like shaq skated to greatness entirely due to his size. it's an incomplete argument. example: for his career, shaq shot 53% from the free throw line. in the infamous game 6 against sacramento, he shot 13-17, for 77%. in the ensuing game 7, he shot 11-15, for 73%. shaq stepped up in two very close, very competitive playoff games. in game 6, the kings shot a mediocre 72% from the free throw line as a team. in game 7, the kings shot a horrifying 53% from the free throw line as a team. even despite this poor team free throw shooting, the kings would have won the series had shaq only hit his average from the free throw line. but shaq stepped up instead, while the kings folded. greatness often rears its head in such moments...
beyond that, shaq wasn't tangling with the smallball centers of today when he was in his prime. the league was still BIG while he was playing, it was tremendously competitive at the PF and C positions, and he was still dominating. as for his part in the kings-lakers rivalry of old, i can understand the tension that results for a given fan. he was the enemy, and now we're expected to accept him with open arms. to me, it does feel a bit like a bothersome hangnail, but nothing more. i simply expect the entirety of the new regime to build a winner. if shaq gets some of the credit for that, then so be it. i'm not too proud to say that i want to watch a winning kings team again, and that has to happen on the court, where shaq's influence as a minority owner will be just as inconsequential as the percentage of his stake in the team...
Last edited by a moderator:
Btw supposedly there's a press conference going on live.
http://www.nba.com/kings/kings-livestream-coverage
It's midnight here so I'm hoping they start soon! Just happened to see the link when I was visiting the Kings website.
Edit: Dang it's at 1pm E.T. Off to bed for me then!
http://www.nba.com/kings/kings-livestream-coverage
It's midnight here so I'm hoping they start soon! Just happened to see the link when I was visiting the Kings website.
Edit: Dang it's at 1pm E.T. Off to bed for me then!
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
Kingster
Hall of Famer
If they brought in a Kobe (retired), Magic, Karl Malone, Bird and Shaq, my only dissapointment would be that they didn't have Robert Horry on the bench to give fist bumps during the last two minutes of every game. The insular parochial smallish Kings world is gone. Thank goodness.
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
That is pathetic.
If that were true, and I don't for an instant believe you BTW, what exactly would you be a fan of again? If all you want is a winning team, hey Miami is doing it great right now.
A brief refresher in NBA iconography:
-- former Laker Mitch Kupchak is their GM, he followed former Laker Jerry West. Their face owner for years was former Laker Magic Johnson. Insular parochial small world indeed.
-- Joe Dumars GMs the Pistons.
-- Danny Ainge GMs the Celtics.
-- John Paxson GMs the Bulls (where Scottie Pippen also works in the front office)
-- Pat Riley used to coach, now part owns and GMs the Heat.
-- Flip Saunders is back in Minnesota as its GM.
-- Jason Kidd, with no coaching experience at all, was hired to coach his former team the Nets
-- Larry Bird has returned to Indiana where he's a legend
-- Michael Jordan owns the Bobcats because they are in North Carolina where he's a legend
-- Hakeem has long been associated with the Rockets
etc.
and notable of course are all the sorts of names that ARE not associated with franchises around the league.
usses and thems. To deny legacy and history and rivalry is to deny the very reason to even have a league or be a fan. Your colors mean something. Your usses mean something. your history means something. If they don't, then you're not a fan of anything. Its definitional. Its the whole point of the exercise.
Last edited:
Maybe you should be the one to go follow another team, since you obviously have no respect for this fanbase or respect for the new FO. It's getting really damn old you telling anyone who might be excited about a move like this to stop following the Kings.
randymoss1881
Starter
I believe we are gonna see a different cousins this year. Between coach malone who had said they want him in the paint posting up and now a mentor who preached that big man play in the paint, rebound, and run on offense to get easy baskets and then you add in a pass first ph cousins should rise up. Look for his field goal % to get to 50%
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
“The new name of the town will be ‘Shaq-ramento, capital of California.” —Shaquille O’Neal, now one of the O’ners of the Sacramento Kings, at his introductory press conference.
PurpleHaze
All-Star
Why not? Sure beats Cowtown.
Gary
All-Star
Feel the same way but boys will be boys, meaning he's not going to stop lol. Once is funny, twice is a little "ha ha-chucke" the 50th time is just tiresome. Maybe he does need to follow another team which doesn't stress him out so much?
whozit
Starter
uolj
Starter
Others have already given the same thoughts I had on the subject, but I'm not a fan of this. The only benefit I see is in gaining publicity to reach out to international or other new markets. That's fine I guess, but I don't like it for Cousins (see below) and of course I'm resistant to it as a Kings fan. Besides, I've never been impressed with O'Neal regardless of what team he was on.
The fact that O'Neal was successful does not automatically mean that he would be a positive mentor. I don't see any other indication that he could be besides that.
Sure. Based on the (limited) information we have on Shaq, I don't see that he can do a whole lot for Cousins. I don't really see their personalities meshing. I don't know that Shaq has that many moves he can teach Cousins (and he has already said he wouldn't be teaching DeMarcus any actual moves). To me it's more likely that he rubs Cousins the wrong way or does basically nothing (which would rub Cousins the wrong way after all the hype). So yeah, I can definitely see Shaq mentoring Cousins as being a bad thing.
The fact that O'Neal was successful does not automatically mean that he would be a positive mentor. I don't see any other indication that he could be besides that.
Note that there really isn't a discussion thread on this topic as far as I could tell, so apparently that's what this became.
beb0p
Starter
In case some of you missed it, Vivek and Shaq were on CNBC this morning being interviewed about his Kings ownership. This is according to Shaq:
1. Main reason he bought a minority share is because he saw the Kings as a future global brand steered by a brilliant cross-cultural boss. He wants in because he saw an investment opportunity.
2. He is friend with Mastrov, who had helped him built two gyms in Florida, and reached out to Mastrov about buying a minority stake in the Kings after he found out that Vivek was on board.
So basically, if Shaq's mumbling isn't too far off reality (remains to be seen), it was Shaq who reached out to the ownership, not the other way around; and he reached out early in the game, likely before the vote took place and perhaps even before the public knew Vivek was the head honcho. If so, Shaq's name could have been presented to Stern and the board as a minority owner way back when. And maybe, that's one of the motivation for including him - the name recognition.
Also, it sounds like he saw it as a money-making opportunity more than any love for the city of Sacramento. If Vivek had bought the T-Wolves, Shaq would have invested in the T-Wolves.
Now that Shaq has skin in the game, he has a vested interest to see the Kings succeed. He mentioned being a mentor to the players and whatnot. He could be a hand-ons owner in the beginning, but how much influence he has or whether he can maintain a sustained interest remains to be seen.
1. Main reason he bought a minority share is because he saw the Kings as a future global brand steered by a brilliant cross-cultural boss. He wants in because he saw an investment opportunity.
2. He is friend with Mastrov, who had helped him built two gyms in Florida, and reached out to Mastrov about buying a minority stake in the Kings after he found out that Vivek was on board.
So basically, if Shaq's mumbling isn't too far off reality (remains to be seen), it was Shaq who reached out to the ownership, not the other way around; and he reached out early in the game, likely before the vote took place and perhaps even before the public knew Vivek was the head honcho. If so, Shaq's name could have been presented to Stern and the board as a minority owner way back when. And maybe, that's one of the motivation for including him - the name recognition.
Also, it sounds like he saw it as a money-making opportunity more than any love for the city of Sacramento. If Vivek had bought the T-Wolves, Shaq would have invested in the T-Wolves.
Now that Shaq has skin in the game, he has a vested interest to see the Kings succeed. He mentioned being a mentor to the players and whatnot. He could be a hand-ons owner in the beginning, but how much influence he has or whether he can maintain a sustained interest remains to be seen.
bajaden
Hall of Famer
I disagree completely on the mentoring. I agree that because both have entirely different games, I doubt Shaq can be of much help on the court, except maybe in the post, and the mentality of playing in the post. But as a mentor, I can see him being a positive influence. Its one thing to have Clifford Ray, a player that Cousins probably never saw play, tell you how to play the game, than have Shaq tell you how to play the game. Its all about credibility, and Shaq has that. Just as he said in the news conference. He was just like Cousins when he came into the league, but when Phil Jackson became the coach, he couldn't argue with someone that had that many championship rings.
Shaq even said, he wasn't going to spend much time with Cousins actual game, but with his mental approach to the game. How to be a leader, and what that entails. I find it laughable that Bricky called Shaq a moron, which is beneath Bricky to be honest. Shaq can play that role, but he's far from being a moron, which is actually a horrible thing to call someone. It doesn't mean being uneducated about something, but being incapable of being educated because of low mental capacity. Its an insulting and dispicable thing to say about anyone, even if it fits.
Anyone that watched that press conference would never call Shaq a moron. Now you can question his dedication, and sincerity. That all remains to be seen. But at worse, he does little to nothing, or at best, he has a positive influence on Cousins behavior on and off the court. None of this has anything to do with any personal feelings someone may have about Shaq, and some of the things he said. That's up to each individual, and I'm not about to tell you how to feel about it. Personally, I could care less that Shaq played for the Lakers. How many would have turned down Phil Jackson as our head coach if he wanted to coach here? Just asking! For those that may have forgotten, basketball is a game. And yes, we root for our hometown team. But its not like Croatia fighting Serbia with people dying on both sides. Its just a game! No one is raping your wife, or killing your children. Its just a game! And just so Bricky knows. My self respect doesn't come from the Kings, or Sacramento, or how I'm perceived on this forum. It comes from how I've lived my life. The good, and the bad things I've done in my life. It comes from how I'm perceived by my children and and my friends. To insinuate that I, or anyone else has lost their self respect because they've welcomed Shaq, is the biggest pile of rubbish I've ever heard. Its just a game, and there are more important things in the world to get upset about.
If you don't like Shaq, I'm alright with that. I won't call you names because you feel that way. I won't call you stupid or a moron. You know what, I'll no longer try to change your mind. Be decent enough to do the same.
uolj
Starter
I think you're actually taking it more seriously than some, even though you're trying to argue we should take it less seriously. I assume people who appear to be up in arms over this are actually playing it up because it's just a game. But that's just my impression. Certainly makes it easier to read, though.
What I would say about your view is that I disagree that at worst O'Neal does little or nothing. That's not the worst he could do. His personality seems to be exactly the kind of personality that Cousins would be annoyed by. Whether that will actually happen or not we'll have to see, but the worst that can happen is that O'Neal annoys Cousins enough to sour him on the new franchise brass.
I'd also point out that while I don't think O'Neal is dumb, I do have doubts about whether he has any kind of insight to offer. I certainly didn't see much from his time as an analyst on TV or from his public comments. Nor do I recall O'Neal being an especially good leader during his time in the NBA. I won't say that he had a poor work ethic because I assume that it would be difficult to be as good as he was without a decent one, but his weight issues and free throw issues are indicators that maybe he didn't take his craft quite as seriously as I'd like Cousins to.
Maybe Ranadivé sees something that O'Neal can bring to the franchise that isn't obvious to us. We'll see. But I'm pretty skeptical at the moment. It's just too close to something the Maloofs would do and be excoriated for.
Vivek's business acumen is really, really, really, really, really impressive. The guy flat out gets how to run an organization: Get the most talented and smart people around you to make your life easier. Don't micromanage everything. Develop your product/brand. Just awesome.
I loved the bit when they were talking about Shaq's past history with the Kings and how some fans could not let it go *ahem*. His response that his company, instead of trying to compete with a rival that had a superior product, would go GET that company to join with him. Now, as many have stated, Shaq will likely not have a ground-breaking impact on the team. However, he is no doubt a huge name to put behind the team, he has a dedicated fan following that might come check out what's happening in Sacramento, and there's a chance he's the Vocal mentor that Cousins needs to take the next step. As Baja said, it's one thing for a Clifford Ray to tell you what to do. It's a completely different thing coming for a top 10 player, 4x NBA champion, and one of the greatest bigs to play the game
Still, the little bit of what Shaq told us was spot on the money. That Cousins needs to play hard every night. That he has to buy into Malone's system, even when he is tired or the Kings are on a losing streak. That if he sets a perfect example, that the rest of the guys will follow. All great stuff. He doesn't "need" a coach to tell him how to play the game. It's a matter of him keeping his head on straight and playing to his potential on a nightly basis
I loved the bit when they were talking about Shaq's past history with the Kings and how some fans could not let it go *ahem*. His response that his company, instead of trying to compete with a rival that had a superior product, would go GET that company to join with him. Now, as many have stated, Shaq will likely not have a ground-breaking impact on the team. However, he is no doubt a huge name to put behind the team, he has a dedicated fan following that might come check out what's happening in Sacramento, and there's a chance he's the Vocal mentor that Cousins needs to take the next step. As Baja said, it's one thing for a Clifford Ray to tell you what to do. It's a completely different thing coming for a top 10 player, 4x NBA champion, and one of the greatest bigs to play the game
Still, the little bit of what Shaq told us was spot on the money. That Cousins needs to play hard every night. That he has to buy into Malone's system, even when he is tired or the Kings are on a losing streak. That if he sets a perfect example, that the rest of the guys will follow. All great stuff. He doesn't "need" a coach to tell him how to play the game. It's a matter of him keeping his head on straight and playing to his potential on a nightly basis
Bosnian Diehard
Starter
It's just Shaq's sense of humor, and he is pretty funny sometimes.
bajaden
Hall of Famer
I think you're actually taking it more seriously than some, even though you're trying to argue we should take it less seriously. I assume people who appear to be up in arms over this are actually playing it up because it's just a game. But that's just my impression. Certainly makes it easier to read, though.
What I would say about your view is that I disagree that at worst O'Neal does little or nothing. That's not the worst he could do. His personality seems to be exactly the kind of personality that Cousins would be annoyed by. Whether that will actually happen or not we'll have to see, but the worst that can happen is that O'Neal annoys Cousins enough to sour him on the new franchise brass.
I'd also point out that while I don't think O'Neal is dumb, I do have doubts about whether he has any kind of insight to offer. I certainly didn't see much from his time as an analyst on TV or from his public comments. Nor do I recall O'Neal being an especially good leader during his time in the NBA. I won't say that he had a poor work ethic because I assume that it would be difficult to be as good as he was without a decent one, but his weight issues and free throw issues are indicators that maybe he didn't take his craft quite as seriously as I'd like Cousins to.
Maybe Ranadivé sees something that O'Neal can bring to the franchise that isn't obvious to us. We'll see. But I'm pretty skeptical at the moment. It's just too close to something the Maloofs would do and be excoriated for.
Actually, I'm not taking this very seriously at all. To be honest, I think its much to do about nothing, at least as far as how the team on the floor is affected. I think Ranadive see's Shaq as more of a PR tool, that can immediately bring more name recognition to the Kings. Not only nationally, but world wide. It really doesn't matter how we perceive Shaq, its how the rest of the country, world perceives him. To many, the focus is just on Sacramento, and that's fine. To some extent, that's the mentality that kept Sacramento's image as a cowtown. Accepting change is one of the hardest things for anyone to do. Its why people spend half their lives working a job they hate. The alternative scares them because it comes with unknowns.
I guess I'm surprised how seriously others are taking this, almost offering ultimatum's over it. I'm starting to believe that the Maloof's have had such a poisoning effect on the fans, that they instantly look for the worse that can happen in everything the new management does. Not everyone of course. I would bet that if you went out onto the street and took a poll, you'd find that the majority are fairly upbeat about Shaq adding his name to the ownership list. In the end, it doesn't matter what I think, or what anyone else thinks. All that matters are the results. If this ends up being a disaster, I'll be one of the first to say so. There really isn't any right or wrong here. No one knows the outcome. Its all just opinion.
uolj
Starter
I think you misunderstood my point, baja. A few people on a message board using hyperbole to complain about a move that they don't like does not mean the Maloof's have had a poisoning effect on the fans. When I don't take others' posts so seriously things don't seem so bad. Makes my reading and discussing easier that way.
I see him go off on things like this sometimes. His analysis of players through stats and strategies is excellent but other areas like the one being discussed can be grating sometimes. But hey, no one is perfect, right? =P
If you'd actually watched the press conference you would have seen that it was clearly a joke at the end of his introductory statement ... They did roll with the joke throughout the presser but I see it as a way of trying to integrate Shaq into the community. Lighten up!
Last edited:
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
Here's the essence of the "personnel matters" thing.
I can't see a problem with that. He's basically saying he's open to listening to a former NBA player's thoughts, not that he's giving him a pen and a blank contract and asking him to go out and chase free agents. I mean, every piece of advice from Shaq must necessarily decrease, if ever so slightly, the factor that those darn advanced statistics might play in PD'A's personnel moves, right?
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
Here's the essence of the "personnel matters" thing.
I can't see a problem with that. He's basically saying he's open to listening to a former NBA player's thoughts, not that he's giving him a pen and a blank contract and asking him to go out and chase free agents. I mean, every piece of advice from Shaq must necessarily decrease, if ever so slightly, the factor that those darn advanced statistics might play in PD'A's personnel moves, right?
Oh I'm not too concerned. First Shaq has no power, he just thinks he does. Second PDA has done nothing at this point for me to regret his acumen being impugned.
