Worst Trade Ever

Monday, July 12, 2004
Sorry that this has become the source for all things Lakers but I can't help but write about this. The Lakers have decided to trade Shaquille O'Neal to Miami for a pile of crap otherwise known as Lamar Odom, Caron Butler, and the flies that surround it (otherwise known as Brian Grant)

For those who don't follow the Lakers I'll give a brief synopsis of what is going on. Kobe Bryant is a free agent and the Lakers are bending over backwards to make sure they get him back. Most of you know I'm a Kobe fan so I don't have a problem with this. Even though I will admit that you can't replace Shaq I don't think the Lakers have a choice in the matter. If you let Kobe go but keep Shaq, Shaq eats up so much of the salary cap ($30 out of $45 million) that you can't get more players to stay competitive. So your only choice is to sign Kobe and trade Shaq and hope to get better either via the trade or in the future when you get some more salary cap and Shaq's $30 million comes off the books. I keep Kobe because he is younger and he tries harder. He is more easily replaced than Shaq but I'm pretty sick of a guy who is 7'1" 350 lbs and can't lead the league in rebounds, blocked shots, or be on the NBA first team all defense.

But that doesn't mean you give away the farm either. And what they Laker's got is a pile of crap. Seriously, I would take a pile of crap over what the Lakers got. Why? The three players are all decent but none is a superstar. You need superstars to win, Kobe, no matter how great he is, by himself is not enough. The worse part is that Brian Grant's contract is enormous. $45 million over the next 3 years. That means you are stuck with this team for the next 3 years. Do you really think the Lakers can win a championship with this team over the next 3 years? NO WAY. I would much prefer them to get under the cap as quickly as possible and go after free agents in a year or two. If they can't sign Kobe with Shaq on the roster than so be it. Forget Kobe, and let Shaq opt out of his contract next year and start over. It's better than getting screwed in the ass.


susan said...

I can see you feel strongly about this. I am not a basketball expert by any stretch of the imagination. I watch basketball on TV sometimes - college basketball. I like the Lakers and have been to two Lakers games at the Forum (er...Staples) but that was in Wilt Chamberlain's era. So you see I know nothing. But isn't it possible that three good-but-not-great players would be better than one superstar and two mediocre players? Just asking.

T said...

As a general rule in basketball it is better to have one great player and a few OK players than it is to have 3 pretty good players. That's how the Bulls won, thats how the Spurs won, and that's how the Lakers have won (altough they had 2 great players and 3 average players). In basketball, unlike a lot of the other sports, one dominant player can really direct the course of the game. With the exception of maybe a baseball pitcher (who can really only pitch one out of 5 games) no one player has as much influence on a game as a NBA superstar. You just keep feeding him the ball and he will just keep putting the ball in the basket. This puts tremendous pressure on the other team to do the same. If they don't have one go to guy it gets much harder for them to find someone who can also put the ball in the hoop.

susan said...

So does that mean we could just do away with all the running and pushing and shoving and just each team pick their best guy for a game of HORSE and get the same results :-)

Jen said...

I'm not a basketball person either, but I do know from watching MTV's "Cribs" that the only two emblems Shaq has posted in his house are the Superman logo (apparently and egotistically referring to himself) and the Lakers' logo. (He had Lakers wallpaper made especially for the purpose.) It reminds me of the Superbowl commercial of the player receiving a team mascot tattoo while learning he was traded to another team.

I think Shaq has enough money for new wallpaper, though.

Ryan said...

i like susan's idea, but i think they should just thumb wrestle.