The Instigator
FunkeeMonk91
Pro (for)
Winning
21 Points
The Contender
clsmooth
Con (against)
Losing
9 Points

Shawn Marion/Shaquille O'Neal Trade

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/6/2008 Category: Sports
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,044 times Debate No: 2453
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (10)

 

FunkeeMonk91

Pro

First, let me say this: I HATE TO SEE THE MATRIX GO! He was one of my all time favorite players, and he can never be replaced, but after some thought, I've decided that it was for the best.

Shawn Marion was having issues with the Suns organization since the beginning of the season. In fact, he was almost traded. But we decided to keep him. Since then, the Suns have had somewhat of a lackluster season. As a result, Shawn Marion decided not to renew his contract for next year. We had to trade him. If not, he would have been signed by another team and we would have received no one.

Yes, Shaq doesn't exactly fit with the run and gun offense of PHX, but it was good that we got somebody, instead of no one.
clsmooth

Con

Shaq is worse than nobody. He is the worst possible fit for the Suns offense. Even in his prime, Shaq would not have fit in with the Suns, but Shaq is FAR from his prime. He will be a liability to the Suns. He will slow them down.

Shawn Marion is the most underrated player in the NBA. He -- not Nash or Stoudemire -- is the best player on that team. The Suns would be hurt by him leaving as a free agent, but there's no reason to believe they couldn't get something else for him other than Shaq. And I think getting NOTHING for him, i.e. cutting him, would be better than adding the overpaid, over-the-hill, overweight, and often-injured Shaq to the team.
Debate Round No. 1
FunkeeMonk91

Pro

My contention was that a trade was better than no trade. If I wasn't explicit enough, I'm sorry, but that's the angle I was going for. But we'll leave it to the voter to sort out.

Shaq is not worse than no one. He is one of the best centers in the NBA, and would give us some desperate help in the post, on defense, and for rebounds. He won't fit with the run and gun style play, but who said we can't adapt? Mike D'Antoni is one of the best coaches in the league. I'm sure that he won't have a problem making some adjustments to the game plan.

Also, Shaq will help us, even when he's not playing. He's been to the playoffs and to the championship. He knows the do's and don'ts of the post-season. His veteran guidance will definitely help some of our young and/or inexperienced players.

People also say that Shaq has hit record lows in his stats. While this is true, think about the team he was on. The Miami Heat are quickly becoming a dying franchise. They have only one 9 games this whole season, and are last in the Eastern Conference. When a superstar like Shaq is on a losing team, he also loses his motivation. Once he moves to a team that is a playoff contender, i.e. PHX, he will gain some drive and push himself to the limit. Shaq doesn't have much time left in the NBA, so this fresh start will give him a good chance at going out on top.

To say that Shaq is worse than no one doesn't make sense. To just loose a million dollar all-star for nothing is just stupid. Someone is better than no one, and considering the circumstances, didn't get a bad trade.
clsmooth

Con

1. My main contention is that the Suns could have gotten something better than Shaq for Marion. I realize the trading deadline is coming soon. Nevertheless, virtually any other player in the NBA would have been a better fit for the Suns than Shaq. Even a journeyman role player would be better than Shaq. I don't doubt that, even at his advanced age, Shaq IS one of the better centers in the NBA. . . But he is a horrible fit for the Suns. A journeyman would have been better than Shaq, but even with the trade deadline drawing near, the Suns probably could have executed a trade for a decent player or a draft pick.

2. I will go further and say that, yes, no trade at all would have been better. The Suns would have had Marion for the remainder of the season, at least. Who knows, maybe things could have been smoothed over and Marion would have stayed around. Otherwise, they would have had him for the season, vs. having Shaq for the season. Is Shaq going to be around next year? Maybe, but he will be even worse than he is now. He is done. Put a fork in him. Great career, but it's time to hang it up.

3. Someone is not always better than no one. Ever heard of addition by subtraction? It happens all the time in pro sports, especially in the NBA.
Debate Round No. 2
FunkeeMonk91

Pro

1. Your first point is about how Shaq is a bad fit for the Suns. But this is only true if we stick with the run and gun offense. Who said we couldn't adjust? A slower half court game could very well give us an edge this post season. Just look at the past years we've gone to the playoffs. Our energy levels were definitely a factor. It takes a lot out of a team to run like that every game. Maybe this slower pace will be a needed change, and it's all because of Shaq.

2. Marion not only made a public statement saying that he was not coming back, but he also wanted out at the beginning of the year! He's been frustrated with the Suns for months. He figured that the same thing was going to happen that has happened the past three years: we get to the Western Conference playoffs and choke (however, last year's lose was David Stern's fault). He didn't think he had any future here. There was no way he was going to stay.

Also, you argue that Shaq cannot recover from the lackluster season he's had so far. This isn't true. Just like with Kevin Garnett and the Timberwolves, Shaq was never going to win again in Miami. They are a dying franchise, and he needed to get out. But Garnett is doing great in Boston, and I'm sure Shaq is capable of doing the same in PHX. And, there has been a lot, and I mean A LOT of criticism of this trade. The skepticism of Shaq will no doubt motivate him to bring us our much deserved championship.

3. "Addition by subtraction." I agree, but I think this principle was applied to Marion. He was one of the best players we've ever had, but we needed a change. Don't get me wrong, I loved Marion, but I do think that we need some fresh players on this team. True, Shaq is older than most, but his experience and prowess in the post would give the Suns a much needed boost in this push for the playoffs.

Your argument that we could have gotten someone better, even if it were true, doesn't work. There is no way to prove that anyone else would have signed with us, or that they would have become a better fit than Shaq.
clsmooth

Con

1. The Suns have been among the most successful teams in the NBA the last several seasons. Yes, they have failed to capture a championship, but as you point out, last year their playoff failure was a direct result of bad NBA disciplinary policy. The Suns had a winning formula that could have captured them a championship. Why mess with the formula? If it ain't broke, don't fix it. By adding Shaq to the mix -- mixing oil and water -- you have broken something that didn't require fixing. Expect a first-round ouster from the playoffs.

2. Again, there is NO GUARANTEE that Marion would not be back next year. A lot can happen over the course of a season. It's possible the Suns would have won the championship and everything would be fine going into 08-09. But regardless, there's every reason to believe something better than Shaq could have been gotten in an emergency dumping of Marion this year -- especially if you believe, as I do, that almost ANYONE would have been better than Shaq; and indeed, NO ONE would have been better.

Comparing Shaq to KG is completely disingenuous. KG was not averaging 14 points a game for Minnesota before being traded to Boston. He may not have been quite at MVP level, but he was still playing like one of the top five players in the NBA. Shaq, on the other hand, could not even make the All-Star team this year.

3. For the Suns, this trade is a clear example of "subtraction by addition." Shaq is oil and the Suns fluid offense is water. Mixing the two will result in engine congestion and sludge. Steve Kerr will go down as the Matt Millen of the NBA. He needs to get back to TNT, because he obviously has no idea what he's doing as a GM. This will go down as one of the worst trades in NBA history; the malevolent butchering of a great team by an arrogant and untested GM.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by FunkeeMonk91 9 years ago
FunkeeMonk91
I wasn't dodging, I was simply making sure that my contention was understood. I also addressed his arguments about another trade anyway.
Posted by wingnut2280 9 years ago
wingnut2280
It seems like funk is dodging the argument. You're really shifting ground. Marion could be traded for better than Shaq for sure. I guess you are trying to stick smooth with the arg that Shaq is worse than getting nothing, which might actually be true.
10 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Im_always_right 8 years ago
Im_always_right
FunkeeMonk91clsmoothTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by FunkeeMonk91 9 years ago
FunkeeMonk91
FunkeeMonk91clsmoothTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by sccrplyr40 9 years ago
sccrplyr40
FunkeeMonk91clsmoothTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by thegreatdebator 9 years ago
thegreatdebator
FunkeeMonk91clsmoothTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by reagan_views 9 years ago
reagan_views
FunkeeMonk91clsmoothTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by els21 9 years ago
els21
FunkeeMonk91clsmoothTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by gogott 9 years ago
gogott
FunkeeMonk91clsmoothTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by sully 9 years ago
sully
FunkeeMonk91clsmoothTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by mikelwallace 9 years ago
mikelwallace
FunkeeMonk91clsmoothTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by clsmooth 9 years ago
clsmooth
FunkeeMonk91clsmoothTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03