Author Topic: Snack O'Neal  (Read 70371 times)

Dos Equis

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63566
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Snack O'Neal
« Reply #275 on: October 28, 2010, 05:19:55 PM »

Why didn't you referance Miami?

The guy makes what a million or two a season?

Let it go, haha.

The Boston v. Miami line:

9 points, 7 rebounds, 0 assists, 0 steals, 1 block, 1 turnover, 2 fouls. 

He's still good value and was a good signing by Boston.  He's no longer the most overpaid athlete in pro sports. 

But let it go?  Are you kidding?  I've been at this for over three years.  It's way too much fun.   :D

body88

  • Guest
Re: Snack O'Neal
« Reply #276 on: October 29, 2010, 06:59:40 AM »
The Boston v. Miami line:

9 points, 7 rebounds, 0 assists, 0 steals, 1 block, 1 turnover, 2 fouls. 

He's still good value and was a good signing by Boston.  He's no longer the most overpaid athlete in pro sports. 

But let it go?  Are you kidding?  I've been at this for over three years.  It's way too much fun.   :D


Trust me, I am looking for a reason to blast the Celtics for bringing in "snack".

That being said, I can't figure out a better stop-gap option until Perk comes back. I'm done with the NBA, anyway!!!!!! 

Dos Equis

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63566
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Snack O'Neal
« Reply #277 on: October 29, 2010, 02:34:16 PM »

Trust me, I am looking for a reason to blast the Celtics for bringing in "snack".

That being said, I can't figure out a better stop-gap option until Perk comes back. I'm done with the NBA, anyway!!!!!! 

I don't think you'll have much of an opportunity to do that.  Jermaine O'Neal and Perkins are good enough.  Snack doesn't have to do much till Perkins comes back.  If Boston was counting on him to be a no. 2 or 3 option, they'd be in trouble. 

Dos Equis

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63566
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Snack O'Neal
« Reply #278 on: November 03, 2010, 03:26:39 PM »
 :-X

How Many of Celtics' 82 Games Will Shaquille O'Neal Play This Season?
by Mike Cole on Wed, Nov 3, 2010

Celtics center Shaquille O'Neal injured his knee on Friday against the Knicks. On Tuesday, he was out of the lineup, missing the C's' game in Detroit.

There was probably no one anywhere who thought that the big guy would play in all 82 games for the Celtics this season. He is 38. Not only that, he's got a lot of miles on those big legs, the same legs that have had to support his 325-pound frame throughout his entire Hall of Fame career.

But for O'Neal to miss a game this early in the season, for whatever the reason, is a bit disheartening. When you factor in the play of fellow center Jermaine O'Neal who has been disappointing, really, so far, along with the fact that Kendrick Perkins won't be back until January, you kind of need Shaq.

Jermaine O'Neal has also battled knee issues already this season and Turkish rookie Semih Erden is not the answer, nor is the undersized Glen Davis, at least not at the center position for an extended period of time.

The Celtics will, for better or for worse, need to lean on Shaq. That could prove to be an issue, however. Shaq played 73 games in 2004-05 for the Miami Heat. Since then, though, he's only averaged 58 games played a season. In fairness, it must be noted that the Diesel played 75 games as recently as two years ago.

When Perkins returns, this will become obviously less of a problem. Until No. 43 steps onto the parquet, though, this will remain an issue for the Celtics. Without the O'Neals, they lack depth up front. With Jermaine O'Neal actually playing, they may well lack consistency. If there's any point of the season they may really need Shaq, it will be right now.

Of course, if he can contribute, the Celtics will take what they can get from him all season. The question is, of course, how many times will he able to give them anything this season?

Was Tuesday the start of a disturbing trend or will the Celtics be able to rely on Shaq for the majority of this season?

http://www.nesn.com/2010/11/how-many-of-the-celtics-82-games-will-shaquille-oneal-play-this-season.html

Dos Equis

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63566
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Snack O'Neal
« Reply #279 on: November 21, 2010, 01:30:26 PM »
The Snack stat line from today's game against Toronto:

8 points, 5 rebounds, 1 assist, 0 steals, 2 blocks, 1 turnover, and 6 fouls in 20 minutes.  More fouls than rebounds.  I wonder if he is the all-time NBA leader in this category (by centers)?   :)

Mr Nobody

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40197
  • Falcon gives us new knowledge every single day.
Re: Snack O'Neal
« Reply #280 on: November 21, 2010, 01:34:33 PM »
The Snack stat line from today's game against Toronto:

8 points, 5 rebounds, 1 assist, 0 steals, 2 blocks, 1 turnover, and 6 fouls in 20 minutes.  More fouls than rebounds.  I wonder if he is the all-time NBA leader in this category (by centers)?   :)
Probably is Bill Laimbeer he was the "hachet man" I understand.

Doug_Steele

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 10873
  • I'm totally Brolic, bro!
Re: Snack O'Neal
« Reply #281 on: November 21, 2010, 01:40:57 PM »
Probably is Bill Laimbeer he was the "hachet man" I understand.

Bill also played D and never gave up on plays.  8) They were the "Bad Boys" for a reason.
D

Dos Equis

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63566
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Snack O'Neal
« Reply #282 on: November 21, 2010, 01:53:08 PM »
Probably is Bill Laimbeer he was the "hachet man" I understand.

Maybe.  He fouled a lot, but remember the stat is more fouls than rebounds in a game. 

Mr Nobody

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40197
  • Falcon gives us new knowledge every single day.
Re: Snack O'Neal
« Reply #283 on: November 21, 2010, 01:59:32 PM »
Bill also played D and never gave up on plays.  8) They were the "Bad Boys" for a reason.
Yep good teams back in those days.

Doug_Steele

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 10873
  • I'm totally Brolic, bro!
Re: Snack O'Neal
« Reply #284 on: November 21, 2010, 02:03:42 PM »
D

body88

  • Guest
Re: Snack O'Neal
« Reply #285 on: November 25, 2010, 08:24:27 AM »
Hey beach, why not give credit where it is due?

25 points 11 rebounds last night. NOT THAT I WATCH THE MOTHER FUCKING NBA ANYMORE OR ANYTHING!!!!!111

Dos Equis

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63566
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Snack O'Neal
« Reply #286 on: November 25, 2010, 03:22:47 PM »
Hey beach, why not give credit where it is due?

25 points 11 rebounds last night. NOT THAT I WATCH THE MOTHER FUCKING NBA ANYMORE OR ANYTHING!!!!!111

Body he played a great game.  If he continues to play at that level, Boston will be tough to beat.   

But he still reminds me of:



tallgerman

  • Time Out
  • Getbig IV
  • *
  • Posts: 1389
  • I love myself a lot.
Re: Snack O'Neal
« Reply #287 on: November 25, 2010, 05:33:54 PM »
kobe's victories so staged.
pure marketing
celtics owned them
refs owned celtics in 4th
I bet orlando had same problem year b4
gota keep homies having thier superstar kobe lol
his wife ugs I dont get him at all

reason I dont liek is his game is predicated on the refs

withotu all those gime calls hes just another gunner

Dos Equis

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63566
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Snack O'Neal
« Reply #288 on: December 04, 2010, 06:59:44 AM »
Snack's stat line from the Boston win against the Bulls last night (20 minutes):

12 points, 5 rebounds, 2 assists, 0 steals, 0 blocks, 1 turnover, 6 fouls.  More fouls than rebounds yet again. 

Dos Equis

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63566
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Snack O'Neal
« Reply #289 on: December 25, 2010, 03:10:52 PM »
The line from today's loss to the Magic (13 minutes):

2 points, 1 rebound, 0 assists, 1 block, 2 turnovers, 6 fouls.  More fouls than rebounds, points, etc. 

body88

  • Guest
Re: Snack O'Neal
« Reply #290 on: December 25, 2010, 10:52:20 PM »
I get the point of this thread; it's funny....just don't get why you never include the good nights this guy has  ???

Dos Equis

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63566
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Snack O'Neal
« Reply #291 on: December 26, 2010, 07:13:32 AM »
I get the point of this thread; it's funny....just don't get why you never include the good nights this guy has  ???

Actually, I included several posts throughout the thread about his "good" games.  He doesn't have many of those. 

That said, the point of the thread is to highlight the decline of the Big Fattie, which means I don't care much about his good games, infrequent though they may be.

UPINTHEMGUTS

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5633
  • I can spot crazy pussy....
Re: Snack O'Neal
« Reply #292 on: December 27, 2010, 12:45:48 PM »
Actually, I included several posts throughout the thread about his "good" games.  He doesn't have many of those.  

That said, the point of the thread is to highlight the decline of the Big Fattie, which means I don't care much about his good games, infrequent though they may be.

Why the hate on the big fella? He's almost 39 years old so of course he's way past his prime. He still is valuable due to to his sheer size(which you can't coach)

Without Shaq as a Laker, Kobe is a 2-time champion and you can throw out the 3 titles between 2000-02. You should love the guy for what he did for the Lakers. He helped make them relevant again when he came over as a free agent.

Post-Magic Johnson era....the Lakers were sucking balls before Shaq came to town.

Dos Equis

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63566
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Snack O'Neal
« Reply #293 on: December 27, 2010, 05:00:58 PM »
Why the hate on the big fella? He's almost 39 years old so of course he's way past his prime. He still is valuable due to to his sheer size(which you can't coach)

Without Shaq as a Laker, Kobe is a 2-time champion and you can throw out the 3 titles between 2000-02. You should love the guy for what he did for the Lakers. He helped make them relevant again when he came over as a free agent.

Post-Magic Johnson era....the Lakers were sucking balls before Shaq came to town.

I love what he did for the Lakers.  He was a beast.  But without Kobe as a Laker, Shaq does not win 3 straight championships. 

Actually, the Lakers couldn't get over the hump until Phil came to town.  He took basically the same team (including Shaq and Kobe) that couldn't win the year before to a championship, plus two more.

But all that is history.  The Big Fattie is now a (BIIIIG) shell of his former self.   :)

Also, like I said earlier, he is a good addition to Boston.  They are going to be pretty good when Perkins and both O'Neals are healthy. 

body88

  • Guest
Re: Snack O'Neal
« Reply #294 on: December 27, 2010, 05:09:15 PM »
I love what he did for the Lakers.  He was a beast.  But without Kobe as a Laker, Shaq does not win 3 straight championships. 

Actually, the Lakers couldn't get over the hump until Phil came to town.  He took basically the same team (including Shaq and Kobe) that couldn't win the year before to a championship, plus two more.

But all that is history.  The Big Fattie is now a (BIIIIG) shell of his former self.   :)

Also, like I said earlier, he is a good addition to Boston.  They are going to be pretty good when Perkins and both O'Neals are healthy. 

I think they are already pretty good. 14 wins straight against teams with winning records (unlike the heat).

Dos Equis

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63566
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Snack O'Neal
« Reply #295 on: December 27, 2010, 05:11:32 PM »
I think they are already pretty good. 14 wins straight against teams with winning records (unlike the heat).

Yeah.  True.  They're already the best team in the East.  They'll be even better with those three healthy. 

UPINTHEMGUTS

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5633
  • I can spot crazy pussy....
Re: Snack O'Neal
« Reply #296 on: December 28, 2010, 07:47:39 AM »
I love what he did for the Lakers.  He was a beast.  But without Kobe as a Laker, Shaq does not win 3 straight championships

Actually, the Lakers couldn't get over the hump until Phil came to town.  He took basically the same team (including Shaq and Kobe) that couldn't win the year before to a championship, plus two more.

But all that is history.  The Big Fattie is now a (BIIIIG) shell of his former self.   :)

Also, like I said earlier, he is a good addition to Boston.  They are going to be pretty good when Perkins and both O'Neals are healthy. 

Shaq was way more valuable to the team during their three titles. Shaq was in his absolute prime during this years and he was a wrecking machine. But agree to disagree.

Dos Equis

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63566
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Snack O'Neal
« Reply #297 on: December 28, 2010, 09:11:59 AM »
Shaq was way more valuable to the team during their three titles. Shaq was in his absolute prime during this years and he was a wrecking machine. But agree to disagree.

Yeah we'll have to agree to disagree.  Kobe was the defensive leader of the team.  Kobe was the finisher in the fourth quarter.  He brought the killer instinct to that team.  No question that Shaq was dominant.  He was unstoppable.  They were one of the best tandems in NBA history, but they needed each other. 

2ND COMING

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6307
  • Might is right.
Re: Snack O'Neal
« Reply #298 on: December 28, 2010, 09:14:05 AM »
I think they both needed robert horry  :P

Dos Equis

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63566
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Snack O'Neal
« Reply #299 on: December 28, 2010, 09:18:10 AM »
I think they both needed robert horry  :P

He certainly helped.  I'm probably one of those in the minority who thinks he should be in the HOF.