Perk gets LA Times Shout-out. Mr Intangible is 31-8 with OKC

[TripleOT]

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-nba-thunder-20120205,0,2586788.story?page=1

This story understands how a guy like Perkins helps his team to success.  A 31-8 regular season record for OKC since Perk joined their line up has to be  1)either the biggest fluke ever, or 2) that Perk provides the toughness and interior defense that this team needed to get over the hump.

Since his teammates seem to relish cult-like praise on the 6 ppg/rpg Perkins, I'm going to go with the latter reason why OKC has been so successful post Perkins trade. Some of the credit has to go to Nazr Mohammed, who has brought some or the same toughness to their second unit.  The opposition doesn't get much of a break physically when Perk goes to the bench.   

BTW, the Celtics are 27-22 in the regular season since trading Perkins.

Sam Presti has created a monster out in OKC, with the help of Danny Ainge.  Already a strong Finals contender, the Thunder could use a backup PG now that they lost Maynor for the season.  Kevin Durant is cementing his reputation as not only a great scorer, but a clutch time assassin.

Durant's also playing solid defense, as is the entire team (5th in FG% allowed, 6th in 3FG% allowed). They're 14th in points allowed, but play at a faster pace, which tend to allow a few more opposition possessions/points.  OKC is giving up 6 less points per game this season over last, with the following improvements -from 45.8 to 42.2 in FG% allowed and 36.1 to 31.8 in 3FG% allowed. They're the same team personnel wise, except for no Green and the addition of Perk and Nazr.   

[GreenEnvy]

I would buy the 'Perk-effect' if our defense had slipped.

It looks every bit as good - if not even better - without him (and without Shaq of course).

They either had terrible play defensively at C before him or they simply upped their intensity on that end. I think it is a bit of both, much like when KG came here. His own defensive greatness inspired better effort from the others, from rookies to accomplished stars like Pierce and Allen.

[Chief]

You know our team had a great record and defense with Scalabrine too. And so do the Bulls. He must be the answer.

[chambers]

Their inside presence on offense is just horrid.
I don't know what they were thinking when they got Perkins and Ibaka as their starting combo in there.
I mean the defense is good, but they are solely relying on Durant+Westbrook, hoping that Harden can hold down a one man show off the bench.

It's like a poor man's Miami, except Westbrook and Durant aren't as good at defending as their Miami counterparts, and they aren't as good period (as a pair).
I feel they need to start Harden and get that rookie Jackson as their 6th man ASAP- which is probably their plan anyway. Maybe if they had three deadly scorers at 1,2 and 3 they could make up for their lack of inside presence.

[rondohondo]

good luck winning a title with a starting front court of Ibaka and Perk. It's not gonna happen . Thats 11ppg from your starting PF/C combined. Bass averages more than that.

 I know you can say Durant, Westbrook and Harden are their go to guys and they are, but if you don't have a PF or C that can score more than 10 ppg , you are in big trouble IMO

The only team that managed to do that was the 1996 Bulls in recent memory . (Rodman was one of the greatest rebounders/defenders of all time,Perk and Ibaka aren't in his league.They also had Toni Kukoc who could score as  a pf)

you have to have at least one scoring threat from the pf/c position

Lakers of 2000's - had shaq , then Pau and Bynum
2011 Dallas  - Dirk
2008 C's - KG
2000's San Antonio - Duncan and Robinson
2004 Detroit - Rasheed
2006 Miami - Shaq
mid 90's Houston - Hakeem

[snively]

The Thunder added by subtraction.  That Jeff Green-Krstic frontcourt was one of the worst starting frontcourts in the NBA.

They have to be disappointed with Perk though.  Having a terrible year on the boards.  Shooting 45%.  Having little effect on D other than his usual stalwart post D.  Not what they paid for.

[TripleOT]

I would buy the 'Perk-effect' if our defense had slipped.

It looks every bit as good - if not even better - without him (and without Shaq of course).

You don't think the Celtics' defense has slipped post-Perk?  The team is as soft as butter with their interior defense.  This year's Celtics team is doing an excellent job holding down teams' shooting percentage, mostly with incredible close out play on shooters (29.4% 3PT defense, compared to 34% last season.

Unfortunately, Boston is at the bottom of the league in rebounding, and that's a big reason why the Cs haven't been able to beat many good teams despite the good defense. Big man play  that mucks up the paint and sets good picks isn't easily quantifiable, but Perk and Nazr most definitely have added that to the Thunder.

The Celtics just don't have any bigs that can or will box out on a consistent basis.  When Bass and KG play together, it's easy pickins on the offensive glass for the opposition. JO is decent at protecting the defensive board, but his health is always in doubt and the guy is very inconsistent in his effort.    

[TripleOT]

There's no doubt that OKC's offensive dynamic is not traditional - their bigs don't shoot.  All four of them average only 17 shots per game, and 20 ppg. However, the team is one of the top three teams in the league offensively.

I totally agree that in theory a team that's reliant on their "littles" for 80 per cent of their offense could be vulnerable in a playoff series, when the other team is more dialed in on stopping your attack.  However, they had the best offensive team in last year's playoffs (points scored). 

Their biggest problem in advancing last year was not getting enough big plays in crunch time in a few critical spots, something that plagues most NBA up and coming teams.   

[GreenEnvy]

I would buy the 'Perk-effect' if our defense had slipped.

It looks every bit as good - if not even better - without him (and without Shaq of course).

You don't think the Celtics' defense has slipped post-Perk?  The team is as soft as butter with their interior defense.  This year's Celtics team is doing an excellent job holding down teams' shooting percentage, mostly with incredible close out play on shooters (29.4% 3PT defense, compared to 34% last season.

Unfortunately, Boston is at the bottom of the league in rebounding, and that's a big reason why the Cs haven't been able to beat many good teams despite the good defense. Big man play  that mucks up the paint and sets good picks isn't easily quantifiable, but Perk and Nazr most definitely have added that to the Thunder.

The Celtics just don't have any bigs that can or will box out on a consistent basis.  When Bass and KG play together, it's easy pickins on the offensive glass for the opposition. JO is decent at protecting the defensive board, but his health is always in doubt and the guy is very inconsistent in his effort.    

I don't think our overall defense is any worse. Our rebounding is just as bad without him. I think Bass cleans up the glass quite well when he has position.

Our defensive ratings have only gotten better since Perk's last full season in 2010.

If you take away the 3 games we didn't have Pierce for to start the season, our defensive numbers are clearly the best in the league.

Even if we are giving up more points in the paint (I can't find the stats on that), that says more about our guards getting blown by than Perk.

[snively]

I would buy the 'Perk-effect' if our defense had slipped.

It looks every bit as good - if not even better - without him (and without Shaq of course).

You don't think the Celtics' defense has slipped post-Perk?  The team is as soft as butter with their interior defense.  This year's Celtics team is doing an excellent job holding down teams' shooting percentage, mostly with incredible close out play on shooters (29.4% 3PT defense, compared to 34% last season.

Unfortunately, Boston is at the bottom of the league in rebounding, and that's a big reason why the Cs haven't been able to beat many good teams despite the good defense. Big man play  that mucks up the paint and sets good picks isn't easily quantifiable, but Perk and Nazr most definitely have added that to the Thunder.

The Celtics just don't have any bigs that can or will box out on a consistent basis.  When Bass and KG play together, it's easy pickins on the offensive glass for the opposition. JO is decent at protecting the defensive board, but his health is always in doubt and the guy is very inconsistent in his effort.   

Perk is rebounding worse than JO this year.  The Thunder team is worse than the C's on the defensive boards. 

[tyrone biggums]

The record between the two teams has more to do with the development of Durant Ibaka Westbrook etc...than Perkins. Perkins has been terrible this year, nothing to see here.

[pearljammer10]

Statwise Perk hasnt been at his best. But Perk bring more to the team than just basketball and I cant believe how much people overlook those things. They are so important to the idea of "team" basketball. Thats why the teams that have won championships have won them the past few years... Team ball, and Perk brings that to the Thunder. Great stat OP.

[Celtics4ever]

Perk is not the same guy he was in 08.   We certainly miss Perk on D and as an enforcer.   I don't miss his meager post offense. I think he was an over rated vastly by the board and an average rebounder at best.  He was servicable but peeps here act like we lost Hakeem.

I think Danny did a good thing letting him walk.  He is not worth what he thought he was in all reality.

But Perk bring more to the team than just basketball and I cant believe how much people overlook those things.

LOL nope.  He is not Mr. Intangible.   Stats like blocks and rebounds matter to Centers.  What things are you mentioning the bobbled passes?   The only thing he might bring is some toughness it is not like he has tremendous basketball IQ.

[Celtic#9]

Their inside presence on offense is just horrid.
I don't know what they were thinking when they got Perkins and Ibaka as their starting combo in there.
I mean the defense is good, but they are solely relying on Durant+Westbrook, hoping that Harden can hold down a one man show off the bench.

It's like a poor man's Miami, except Westbrook and Durant aren't as good at defending as their Miami counterparts, and they aren't as good period (as a pair).
I feel they need to start Harden and get that rookie Jackson as their 6th man ASAP- which is probably their plan anyway. Maybe if they had three deadly scorers at 1,2 and 3 they could make up for their lack of inside presence.

Why would they start Harden? He provides a scoring boost off the bench. Having 3 scorers in the 1st unit and none in the second would be a bad idea. They start Thabo because he is a good defender and 3 poiont shooter and doesn't need to score.

[dtrader]

IMO Serge Ibaka getting minutes changes their defense more than Perk.  Collison and Nazr often outplay Perk, but they dont have anyone that gives them what Ibaka does.  Hardens continued development the last 2 seasons has done a lot too.