Shaqs Laker contract

[Reality]

Anyone other then B-Rad have the facts on what Shaqs veto powers were or were not?

[Special Ed Teacher Mr. Koast]

Anyone other then B-Rad have the facts on what Shaqs veto powers were or were not?

ESPN reported it Corky

[Reality]

Anyone other then B-Rad have the facts on what Shaqs veto powers were or were not?

ESPN reported it Corky

"Anyone other then B-Rad".

 

[msc]

Anyone other then B-Rad have the facts on what Shaqs veto powers were or were not?

Reality, I'm starting to worry about you.  We all know your objective is to get a rise out of Laker fans ... but things must be really slow for you down in beautiful San Diego for you to keep harping on this.  

What on earth does it matter what it says in Shaq's or any other players contract for that matter regarding "veto power"?   Have you been living in a cave in the Mission Hills for the past 10-years?  Pro athletes veto deals all the time regardless of what the language says in their contract.  Heck, Steve Francis and Eli Manning vetoed deals before they even had contracts.  Ron Artest was going to veto the Sac deal but somehow it finally sunk in to his thick skull that this may be his last chance and he wisely back peddled.    

In case you still don't get it, here's how it works.  Team A says to player A, "we're going to trade you to Toronto".  

Player A (or more likely, Player A's agent) then goes to the media and says, "Team A told me they're going to trade me to Toronto, but if they do, I won't report to Toronto".  And if Player A happens to be as well off as Shaq they’ll add, "I’ll just retire rather than play for Toronto".  Now regardless of whether or not Team A is willing to force Player A's hand, Toronto pulls out of the deal knowing that Player A will sabotage.  

Shaq had a short list of teams he would have gone to without blocking the deal.  Miami was at the top of the short list.  He had the Laker organization by the short and curlys and he used his leverage to steer himself to his team of choice.  It’s not that complicated and I’m failing to see what you don’t understand about the situation.  
 

 

[Laker Fan]

I’m failing to see what you don’t understand about the situation.

Not hard for me to see at all

[Special Ed Teacher Mr. Koast]

Anyone other then B-Rad have the facts on what Shaqs veto powers were or were not?

ESPN reported it Corky

"Anyone other then B-Rad".

Now you guys can see why I have changed my posting name to 'Special Ed Teacher Mr. Koast' today  

Apparently Reality is insinuating that I am making up the entire segement on ESPN.  

[Reality]

Anyone other then B-Rad have the facts on what Shaqs veto powers were or were not?

Reality, ...
What on earth does it matter what it says in Shaq's or any other players contract for that matter regarding "veto power"?   .... It’s not that complicated and I’m failing to see what you don’t understand about the situation.

msc,

Really.  Well could you decipher what B-Rads posting this ESPN reference is:

"They had a  segment on ESPN the other night  on how teams hurt themselves  when they trade franchise players to teams that the stars want to goto out of respect to that player.  In it they spoke about how the Lakers could have got better players from other teams but chose a team that was first on his (Shaqs) list to trade him to because they Lakers wanted to show respect for what he did for the organization."

Now, did Shaq or did Shaq not, did the Lakers/did the Lakers not have a say in who he could be traded to.  You inexplicably ended the last thread by saying you did NOT want Buss to have traded Shaq for Elton Brand.  Unreal.

And I know you won't play the phony *class* card attempted by B-Rad.

LFD,  You'll be seeing even clearer very soon.  Others are. :rofl:  :huh:  

[Reality]

Shaq had a short list of teams he would have gone to without blocking the deal.  Miami was at the top of the short list.  He had the Laker organization by the short and curlys and he used his leverage to steer himself to his team of choice.  It’s not that complicated and I’m failing to see what you don’t understand about the situation.

Not to mention Buss did offer Shraq an extension.  That being two more years (2006-7 and '08-9)

Yeah i can see what you are saying.  Zo Mouring screwed over Toronto with that tactic.  

What I'm not buying at all is that no other offers existed or that the Lakers "had" to take the Miami offer.

What are the "veto" rules, whether or not a player finagles around them.  In NFL its 10 and 5.  10 years in league, 5 with same team.  What is NBA?

[msc]

Anyone other then B-Rad have the facts on what Shaqs veto powers were or were not?

Reality, ...
What on earth does it matter what it says in Shaq's or any other players contract for that matter regarding "veto power"?   .... It’s not that complicated and I’m failing to see what you don’t understand about the situation.

msc,

Really.  Well could you decipher what B-Rads posting this ESPN reference is:

"They had a  segment on ESPN the other night  on how teams hurt themselves  when they trade franchise players to teams that the stars want to goto out of respect to that player.  In it they spoke about how the Lakers could have got better players from other teams but chose a team that was first on his (Shaqs) list to trade him to because they Lakers wanted to show respect for what he did for the organization."

Now, did Shaq or did Shaq not, did the Lakers/did the Lakers not have a say in who he could be traded to.  You inexplicably ended the last thread by saying you did NOT want Buss to have traded Shaq for Elton Brand.  Unreal.

And I know you won't play the phony *class* card attempted by B-Rad.

LFD,  You'll be seeing even clearer very soon.  Others are. :rofl:  :huh:

Reality, I never said I didn't want Brand, heck I would have loved Brand.  What I said was that deal never would have happened.  Buss isn't going to trade Shaq to his cross town rival in his own division.  Also, who says Sterling would have even made that deal?  That's another big, unrealistic assumption on your part.  

You see, Reality, you are making the un-realistic assumption that any deal that would have worked salary-wise and fit within the CBA rules, was an option.  In a vacuum this would be the case, but in "reality" it wasn't the case.  See my post above why this wasn't the case.  

I wish your view was "reality", because I would have traded Shaq for KG straight up.  Done and done.  Thanks for coming out.  Problem is Minny never would have offered that because KG is still getting better and just starting to reach his prime, while Shaq is 3 years past his prime.  And even if they did, Shaq likely would have vetoed it anyway for whatever his selfish-arsed reasons would have been (it's too cold, I like Florida, blah blah blah).  
 

[Reality]

QUOTE]
Reality, I never said I didn't want Brand, heck I would have loved Brand.  What I said was that deal never would have happened.  Buss isn't going to trade Shaq to his cross town rival in his own division.  Also, who says Sterling would have even made that deal?  That's another big, unrealistic assumption on your part.

"I know The Donald would have made the trade. I'm saying Jerry Buss would not, and should not, trade Shaq within his own conference, let alone his own division."  msc circa Feb 13th.

Unrealistic to presume Sterling would not have gone for that trade.  Look atThe Donalds history.  Chance to bring in circus Shaq to the Clips?  Done and done.  Even if Sterling would not, you're saying NO other trade options available?  No way.  True the lame dollar for dollar thing was very limiting.

Except that Shaq was under contract to the Lakers.  They did not "have" to trade him one iota.  If he would have came back and tanked, the media would have bbq'd him.  Again, can anyone, tell us what the ESPN article is reffering to:  "In it they spoke about how the Lakers could have got better players from other teams but chose a team that was first on his (Shaqs) list to trade him to because they Lakers wanted to show respect for what he did for the organization."  

The trade was made because of Kobme, not Shaq.

Same conference trades in past?  Affecting the title?  We all know it was Lenny Bias death that helped the Lakers more then anything, still I believe you were part of the Forum crowd when Michael Thompson was a cog in the Lakers 87 & 88?  From San Antonio.  Mid season.  Power forward who could score a little being just what the Lakers needed. :rolleyes:   Yeah who was he traded for :rolleyes:  



 
 

[Not getting to his students Mr.K]

What I'm not buying at all is that no other offers existed or that the Lakers "had" to take the Miami offer.

They didn't HAVE to send him to Miami.  Do you read posts at all?  They chose to deal him to Miami out of respect for him.  That has nothing to do with one player not being bigger than the franchise...I don't think, well I am pretty sure you dont quite understand what people mean when they say that.  I am not always going to spell things out for you.  I want you to do homework and research what people mean when they say that.

The Lakers chose to send him to the #1 team he wanted.  He had a short list of teams he would like to goto.  Rumored teams were Pheonix,  Miami, and Dallas.  Now would the Suns be quick to give up Amare for Shaq?  Would Dallas have given up Dirk?  Salary wise neither add up.  I don't think the Suns would be dumb enough to give up 10 years of Amare for 3 years of Shaq.
 

[Reality]

What I'm not buying at all is that no other offers existed or that the Lakers "had" to take the Miami offer.

Anyone other then B-Rad have the facts on what Shaqs veto powers were or were not?  

[Reality]

The Lakers chose to send him to the #1 team he wanted.  He had a short list of teams he would like to goto.  Rumored teams were Pheonix,  Miami, and Dallas.  Now would the Suns be quick to give up Amare for Shaq?  Would Dallas have given up Dirk?  Salary wise neither add up.  I don't think the Suns would be dumb enough to give up 10 years of Amare for 3 years of Shaq.

Thanks once again for the bandwidth waster.  Already knew the Suns would not give up Amare.  Not sure about Dirk.  Cuban loves Shraq.  Or did until this summer.  Not enough to give up Dirk IMO.

Will you ever respond to your own post of:  "In it they spoke about how the Lakers could have got better players from other teams.

Can we hear of your homework.  Which players?

Your repeated chant of We respect Shaq so much we will take lesser players, thus hurting our own (Lakers) future chances.  :bs:  to the tenth power.  

[Guest_Randy]

The Lakers chose to send him to the #1 team he wanted.  He had a short list of teams he would like to goto.  Rumored teams were Pheonix,  Miami, and Dallas.  Now would the Suns be quick to give up Amare for Shaq?  Would Dallas have given up Dirk?  Salary wise neither add up.  I don't think the Suns would be dumb enough to give up 10 years of Amare for 3 years of Shaq.

Thanks once again for the bandwidth waster.  Already knew the Suns would not give up Amare.  Not sure about Dirk.  Cuban loves Shraq.  Or did until this summer.  Not enough to give up Dirk IMO.

Will you ever respond to your own post of:  "In it they spoke about how the Lakers could have got better players from other teams.

Can we hear of your homework.  Which players?

Your repeated chant of We respect Shaq so much we will take lesser players, thus hurting our own (Lakers) future chances.  :bs:  to the tenth power.

You know what's funny -- your sudden concern of the waste of bandwidth -- since you are the greatest culprit, you're a hypocrit!

[Earth to Reality]

The Lakers chose to send him to the #1 team he wanted.  He had a short list of teams he would like to goto.  Rumored teams were Pheonix,  Miami, and Dallas.  Now would the Suns be quick to give up Amare for Shaq?  Would Dallas have given up Dirk?  Salary wise neither add up.  I don't think the Suns would be dumb enough to give up 10 years of Amare for 3 years of Shaq.

Thanks once again for the bandwidth waster.  Already knew the Suns would not give up Amare.  Not sure about Dirk.  Cuban loves Shraq.  Or did until this summer.  Not enough to give up Dirk IMO.

Will you ever respond to your own post of:  "In it they spoke about how the Lakers could have got better players from other teams.

Can we hear of your homework.  Which players?

Your repeated chant of We respect Shaq so much we will take lesser players, thus hurting our own (Lakers) future chances.  :bs:  to the tenth power.

You cannot be this dense, this is amazing....

Shaq had a short list of teams he would not block a trade to go to.  The Lakers, to show respect to what Shaq was to this organization, sent him to the #1 team on his list.  That was Miami.

Now when ESPN said 'The Lakers could have got better players for Shaq' they probably could of.....from teams that he did not want to goto.  Of the teams reported (I'll repeat it because you did not understand the first time as usual) were Pheonix, Miami, and Dallas.   Of those teams I mentioned the players that could match Shaq's salary and are better than what the Lakers recieved in return.  Are you still following here?

Homework? Again, I am not ESPN.  Maybe you need to send them cryptic emails (similar to the posts you make) and see how far you get.  They said exactly what I told you and that was it.  No specifics.  In fact alot of the segement was about Allen Iverson and what would happen if Philly did decide to trade him.  See AI would only want to goto specific places also and the 76ers have a strong loyalty to Iverson because of what he has done for that franchise.  Similar situation.