I said that if he's unsigned, there's something we don't know. The thing we don't know is that Shaq could have offers that he's mulling. Maybe even from the Jazz. This is not the first time I've said this. Again, repeating myself. Again, making a point to say that I'm repeating myself so you stop saying I'm doing the exact opposite. Two things could be true. He's either super available and everyone is passing on him, or he's not and he's actually mulling offers or is demanding a lot. Given how great Shaq looks on paper, my guess is that it's probably not so simple to sign him and he's seeking something specific. If it is so simple to sign him, there's some intel we're missing because all 30 teams are deciding against it. Doesn't mean all 30 teams are right, but it's something worth considering.
To me, a good argument and conversation considers the whole picture fairly. If you think MJ is better than LeBron, it's ok to say the LeBron was a better passer and three point shooter. To me it shows weakness if you try to spin it and say that MJ was actually a better passer or 3 point shooter or try to ignore that altogether. So for me, I can believe that Shaq would be a very good signing while also acknowledging that there's probably some context I'm missing. Better yet, I can believe that he's a good signing while also acknowledging that he's had a tough time finding a spot in this league, and typically that means you're just not good enough. That's not missing context that's actually plain and obvious. If you consider all data points, even those that don't directly support your conclusion, I consider that a stronger conclusion than only considering the points that support your conclusion.