BBallFreak wrote:and a year less salary doesn't do it) we're not doing this deal...
it's also a year less that dwayne wade will be one of the game's five best players.
Moderators: loserX, Andre Roberstan, HartfordWhalers, Texas Chuck, Mamba4Goat, pacers33granger, BullyKing, MoneyTalks41890, Trader_Joe
BBallFreak wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
Not even for KG.
#1knickfan wrote:^^^ I agree. I think what hurts this deal for Miami is that in addition to trading Shaq for a guy with little to no trade value until next season is that they also trade a pretty good sized expiring deal for Malik Rose who also isn't really a valuable trade chip till next year.
Shaq for Marbury is certainly a starting component for a deal but I think both sides would need to add stuff.
Flash is the Future wrote:1) He'll be 27 in June 2009, and last time I checked a basketball players prime is from 27-30.
2) Shaq sells tickets, even if we're not winning games.
3) With a lotto pick this year we'll have a much better shot at winning it all. The Shaq era is over, but that doesn't mean we should give him away for someone like Marbury. It would cost the franchise at least the 20 million we're saving. No one likes Starbury. People still like Shaq. 1 Year of savings isn't worth that. Especially because the 2009 FA class doesn't even compare to the 2010 one, which is WAY better! We can wait one year...
Return to Trades and Transactions