Doc on WEEI: "No one said no" to Perk trade

[Eja117]

From Red's Army

http://www.redsarmy.com/home/2011/04/doc-on-weei-no-one-said-no-to-perk-trade.html

Doc on WEEI: "No one said no" to Perk trade

I was THIS close to deleting my notes from Doc's weekly WEEI appearance because there was nothing really interesting being said.

Then he was asked about whether the Perkins trade was the right move (here we go).  And to his credit, Doc didn't give a canned answer.  When asked if it was the right move, he said that we'd have to wait and see if it was the right move.  Meaning... if the Celtics win the championship, then it was the right move.  If not, then it might not have been.

When asked, again, about how it all went down (in an effort to see if this is still affecting the guys) Doc said he talked to all the key players about it and no one said no.  Pressed on it and asked specifically if Rajon Rondo was on board, Doc repeated "no one said no."  Obviously the question insinuates Rondo has been p---ed off about the trade and that's the cause of his poor play.  I'm sure Doc's answer is a thinly veiled way of saying it's not.

Yeah... the topic keeps coming up.  And people keep asking and Doc, to his credit (or maybe not) keeps answering.  I hope that this puts and end to the talk...but I know it won't.

Not much else of note from the show other than he thinks Delonte West will play on Sunday.  We don't know about Shaq yet, but its possible.  And when the topic of Kobe's slur came up... the guys jokingly asked what if David Stern had a full-time lip reader on KG?  Doc said "We'd be in trouble."

When are these guys going to stop lying to my face?  I do not believe that they checked with all the important players, coaches, etc and to a man none of them said some variation of "No. I wouldn't do that. I think it's a mistake"

It took us and many members of the media two seconds to identify the problem.  

Celtics. Stop lying. Or admit why it looks like you were wrong. Admit people said you were wrong and it looks like you were wrong. Or admit you're lying. One or the other. You can't have both

[BudweiserCeltic]

From Red's Army

http://www.redsarmy.com/home/2011/04/doc-on-weei-no-one-said-no-to-perk-trade.html

Doc on WEEI: "No one said no" to Perk trade

I was THIS close to deleting my notes from Doc's weekly WEEI appearance because there was nothing really interesting being said.

Then he was asked about whether the Perkins trade was the right move (here we go).  And to his credit, Doc didn't give a canned answer.  When asked if it was the right move, he said that we'd have to wait and see if it was the right move.  Meaning... if the Celtics win the championship, then it was the right move.  If not, then it might not have been.

When asked, again, about how it all went down (in an effort to see if this is still affecting the guys) Doc said he talked to all the key players about it and no one said no.  Pressed on it and asked specifically if Rajon Rondo was on board, Doc repeated "no one said no."  Obviously the question insinuates Rondo has been p---ed off about the trade and that's the cause of his poor play.  I'm sure Doc's answer is a thinly veiled way of saying it's not.

Yeah... the topic keeps coming up.  And people keep asking and Doc, to his credit (or maybe not) keeps answering.  I hope that this puts and end to the talk...but I know it won't.

Not much else of note from the show other than he thinks Delonte West will play on Sunday.  We don't know about Shaq yet, but its possible.  And when the topic of Kobe's slur came up... the guys jokingly asked what if David Stern had a full-time lip reader on KG?  Doc said "We'd be in trouble."

When are these guys going to stop lying to my face?  I do not believe that they checked with all the important players, coaches, etc and to a man none of them said some variation of "No. I wouldn't do that. I think it's a mistake"

It took us and many members of the media two seconds to identify the problem. 

Celtics. Stop lying. Or admit why it looks like you were wrong. Admit people said you were wrong and it looks like you were wrong. Or admit you're lying. One or the other. You can't have both

Doc had made mention of this quite soon after the trade, this is nothing new.

[Eja117]

From Red's Army

http://www.redsarmy.com/home/2011/04/doc-on-weei-no-one-said-no-to-perk-trade.html

Doc on WEEI: "No one said no" to Perk trade

I was THIS close to deleting my notes from Doc's weekly WEEI appearance because there was nothing really interesting being said.

Then he was asked about whether the Perkins trade was the right move (here we go).  And to his credit, Doc didn't give a canned answer.  When asked if it was the right move, he said that we'd have to wait and see if it was the right move.  Meaning... if the Celtics win the championship, then it was the right move.  If not, then it might not have been.

When asked, again, about how it all went down (in an effort to see if this is still affecting the guys) Doc said he talked to all the key players about it and no one said no.  Pressed on it and asked specifically if Rajon Rondo was on board, Doc repeated "no one said no."  Obviously the question insinuates Rondo has been p---ed off about the trade and that's the cause of his poor play.  I'm sure Doc's answer is a thinly veiled way of saying it's not.

Yeah... the topic keeps coming up.  And people keep asking and Doc, to his credit (or maybe not) keeps answering.  I hope that this puts and end to the talk...but I know it won't.

Not much else of note from the show other than he thinks Delonte West will play on Sunday.  We don't know about Shaq yet, but its possible.  And when the topic of Kobe's slur came up... the guys jokingly asked what if David Stern had a full-time lip reader on KG?  Doc said "We'd be in trouble."

When are these guys going to stop lying to my face?  I do not believe that they checked with all the important players, coaches, etc and to a man none of them said some variation of "No. I wouldn't do that. I think it's a mistake"

It took us and many members of the media two seconds to identify the problem. 

Celtics. Stop lying. Or admit why it looks like you were wrong. Admit people said you were wrong and it looks like you were wrong. Or admit you're lying. One or the other. You can't have both

Doc had made mention of this quite soon after the trade, this is nothing new.

I didn't believe him then either

[jdpapa3]

I think that you can tell by Ainge and Doc's words that they don't want to tear down Perk in this process. If he were a video game character and this was a video game, they'd be telling it like it is, but they are doing it in a semi-hidden way. Kind of easy to read between the lines if you ask me!

[Eja117]

The Celtics position on this trade is way too convenient. It's all we made the right decision then. We'd make it again. We did all our homework. This was the only choice. Insert easy lie here.  We think the players we got are great. The way we're playing is just coincidental. It's not due to the trade. Everyone was for this. All of you liked Perk and that's cute, you just don't know what we know. 


Not gonna fly. Not gonna fly

[jdpapa3]

Blaming the trade for our play of late just doesn't add up. Perk's traded and the defense stays the same. Perk plays 5% of our minutes this season and we have the best defense in the league. Our offense was sputtering before Perk was traded. Just doesn't add up for me.

[Roy H.]

Blaming the trade for our play of late just doesn't add up. Perk's traded and the defense stays the same. Perk plays 5% of our minutes this season and we have the best defense in the league. Our offense was sputtering before Perk was traded. Just doesn't add up for me.

Here's the thing, though:  this argument only makes sense if we have a healthy Shaq in the playoffs.  It was Shaq who was part of our fast start.  Our system relies upon having a solid, physical big man in the middle.

If Shaq is playing like he was early in the season, then maybe the trade works out.  However, if Shaq can't play effectively, then we're in serious trouble.   Even without Shaq, this team could have competed with Perk + JO; that's not the case with JO + Krstic.

[bbd24]

So... Do you think Ainge is 100% confident? Because he pulled the trigger I'd say he's pretty darn convinced they can play those type of minutes when it matters.

My guess is that Danny's confidence in Shaq has decreased quite a bit over the past two months.  At the time, I think Danny thought that Shaq's return was imminent.  I think he miscalculated.

My further guess is that if Danny knew Shaq would have played 5 minutes since February, and would be questionable for Game 1, that he'd have never pulled the trigger on the deal.

completely agree.

Also anyone thinking this 'homerun' of a trade was all Danny had going is kidding themselves.  No doubt Semih and Luke could have netted at least Parker from the Cavs.  Just because we didn't get Parker doesn't mean that trade wasn't considered.  The thing to keep in mind is Green deal was already in place and obtaining Parker wasn't needed. 

I'd rather Danny have pulled off that deal and kept Perk.  We know we've been to the finals with that starting lineup and that starting lineup was the one that 'flipped the switch' last year.  Also, Perk was healthy enough to finish out the season as the starter--next season be [dang]ed.  Having a center rotation of Perk, Shaq and JO means you only really need one of the Oneals healthy to come off the bench since Perk can certainly give 30-35 minutes a night for the playoffs.  Now, the team needs both Oneals to really be considered a contender and that's an awful lot of optimism that they'll both hold up through the finals. 

Considering Danny expected Shaq back almost immediately after the trade, this looks like a deal that backfired.  One other item, Green may be far more talented than Sasha or Parker or any of Danny's other Quisy target replacements but keep in mind PP's backup only really needs to cover for him for 12 minutes a game.  People can praise Green's abilities and skills all they want but Doc has not used him like he used Posey and Green has not been that instead firepower or spark off the bench that we needed.  He is a starting-caliber SF wasting on this bench because he'll never start over PP--it'll take another 2 years or more to make this 'deal for the future' pay off and that's if Green stays around that long.

You weren't saying that when he came off the court against Golden State, after a standard basketball play.

[bbd24]

Wow.  There are still people out there that think this was a good trade?

Then again I didn't even think anybody would be for it when it happened.

Actually, I don't think it was just a good trade.  It was a GREAT trade.

You add up all the details involved and you can't think otherwise.

-- Perkins coming off major knee surgery

-- Perkins getting injured yet again after coming back on a standard play

-- Roster depleted with Injuries including Perkins at the time

-- Your team with free agents or additions like Shaq, JO, and Semih didn't miss a beat when Perkins was down and out

-- Can't sign Perk for 4/5 M per

-- Core 4 still here

-- Your not giving him 8/9 M per next season with the core 4 here

-- Received a 24 yr old whose just getting his feet wet in the league who has far more upside than Perkins at this point in his career

-- Also got a backup Center with starter experience, with a future 1st round Clipper pick to help down the road as well

-- Value returned was far greater than letting an injured player walk in the future for virtually nothing

And it may have only cost us a championship.  Big deal. Those are easy enough to come by

Key word there being " may ".

Since you were guaranteed a championship with Perk, darn you Danny for not building around him for all those years he was here.  And darn you Danny for drafting him so late, what were the others thinking ?

Perk is KING !  His 22 mins per game would of brought us championship after championship !  Darn you Danny !

[hpantazo]

Blaming the trade for our play of late just doesn't add up. Perk's traded and the defense stays the same. Perk plays 5% of our minutes this season and we have the best defense in the league. Our offense was sputtering before Perk was traded. Just doesn't add up for me.

Here's the thing, though:  this argument only makes sense if we have a healthy Shaq in the playoffs.  It was Shaq who was part of our fast start.  Our system relies upon having a solid, physical big man in the middle.

If Shaq is playing like he was early in the season, then maybe the trade works out.  However, if Shaq can't play effectively, then we're in serious trouble.   Even without Shaq, this team could have competed with Perk + JO; that's not the case with JO + Krstic.

When we need Shaq, he will be there. The knicks series is a perfect matchup to ease him back in. We don't really need him for this series, and when he plays, he won't play mutch anyway because NY will go small with Amare at center. Shaq will be ready for round 2 against the Heat, and round 3 against the Bulls. JO is looking quite good lately too.

[Roy H.]

Blaming the trade for our play of late just doesn't add up. Perk's traded and the defense stays the same. Perk plays 5% of our minutes this season and we have the best defense in the league. Our offense was sputtering before Perk was traded. Just doesn't add up for me.

Here's the thing, though:  this argument only makes sense if we have a healthy Shaq in the playoffs.  It was Shaq who was part of our fast start.  Our system relies upon having a solid, physical big man in the middle.

If Shaq is playing like he was early in the season, then maybe the trade works out.  However, if Shaq can't play effectively, then we're in serious trouble.   Even without Shaq, this team could have competed with Perk + JO; that's not the case with JO + Krstic.

When we need Shaq, he will be there. The knicks series is a perfect matchup to ease him back in. We don't really need him for this series, and when he plays, he won't play mutch anyway because NY will go small with Amare at center. Shaq will be ready for round 2 against the Heat, and round 3 against the Bulls. JO is looking quite good lately too.

Let's hope so.

[BudweiserCeltic]

Blaming the trade for our play of late just doesn't add up. Perk's traded and the defense stays the same. Perk plays 5% of our minutes this season and we have the best defense in the league. Our offense was sputtering before Perk was traded. Just doesn't add up for me.

Here's the thing, though:  this argument only makes sense if we have a healthy Shaq in the playoffs.  It was Shaq who was part of our fast start.  Our system relies upon having a solid, physical big man in the middle.

If Shaq is playing like he was early in the season, then maybe the trade works out.  However, if Shaq can't play effectively, then we're in serious trouble.   Even without Shaq, this team could have competed with Perk + JO; that's not the case with JO + Krstic.

So, if Pierce goes down, what then? Thank god we have Sasha?

It's not ideal to have Krstic instead of Perk, but it allowed us to be better prepared to various scenarios in which a key player goes down.

In this current case, it just so happens we have Shaq down. Even with all that, we still have Krstic and JO to fill in (and Murphy).

So if Perk suddenly goes down for the Thunder, does that suddenly mean that it was an awesome trade by Ainge?

Come on. The only thing that Ainge did was improve the talent on the bench, get healthier, and improve the contingencies of every position in the even that a key player goes down.

[bbd24]

Blaming the trade for our play of late just doesn't add up. Perk's traded and the defense stays the same. Perk plays 5% of our minutes this season and we have the best defense in the league. Our offense was sputtering before Perk was traded. Just doesn't add up for me.

Here's the thing, though:  this argument only makes sense if we have a healthy Shaq in the playoffs.  It was Shaq who was part of our fast start.  Our system relies upon having a solid, physical big man in the middle.

If Shaq is playing like he was early in the season, then maybe the trade works out.  However, if Shaq can't play effectively, then we're in serious trouble.   Even without Shaq, this team could have competed with Perk + JO; that's not the case with JO + Krstic.

So, if Pierce goes down, what then? Thank god we have Sasha?

It's not ideal to have Krstic instead of Perk, but it allowed us to be better prepared to various scenarios in which a key player goes down.

In this current case, it just so happens we have Shaq down. Even with all that, we still have Krstic and JO to fill in (and Murphy).

So if Perk suddenly goes down for the Thunder, does that suddenly mean that it was an awesome trade by Ainge?

Come on. The only thing that Ainge did was improve the talent on the bench, get healthier, and improve the contingencies of every position in the even that a key player goes down.

+1

And opened up options for the future to boot.

[hpantazo]

Blaming the trade for our play of late just doesn't add up. Perk's traded and the defense stays the same. Perk plays 5% of our minutes this season and we have the best defense in the league. Our offense was sputtering before Perk was traded. Just doesn't add up for me.

Here's the thing, though:  this argument only makes sense if we have a healthy Shaq in the playoffs.  It was Shaq who was part of our fast start.  Our system relies upon having a solid, physical big man in the middle.

If Shaq is playing like he was early in the season, then maybe the trade works out.  However, if Shaq can't play effectively, then we're in serious trouble.   Even without Shaq, this team could have competed with Perk + JO; that's not the case with JO + Krstic.

So, if Pierce goes down, what then? Thank god we have Sasha?

It's not ideal to have Krstic instead of Perk, but it allowed us to be better prepared to various scenarios in which a key player goes down.

In this current case, it just so happens we have Shaq down. Even with all that, we still have Krstic and JO to fill in (and Murphy).

So if Perk suddenly goes down for the Thunder, does that suddenly mean that it was an awesome trade by Ainge?

Come on. The only thing that Ainge did was improve the talent on the bench, get healthier, and improve the contingencies of every position in the even that a key player goes down.

one of the main reasons we lost in the finals last year was because we had no one on the bench capable of giving Sheed a break in game 7 when Perk was out, so yes, contingency plans are important.

[jdpapa3]

Our system relies upon having a solid, physical big man in the middle.

Defensively? Or both?