What is Perk really worth?

[bdm860]

To be nice, I would say that Perk is worth his weight in gold...but that would just be a ridiculous amount of gold.  So, that would be an extreme overstatement.

amazingly enough, perk weighs 280 pounds, which is 4,480 ounces.

gold is going for about $1,010 per ounce.

so a solid gold perk is worth $4,524,800.

his salary was $4,078,880.

so in terms of being worth his weight in gold, perk is being under paid. 

Now if that analysis doesn't get a TP I don't know what does!  You went above and beyond with that one hwangjini. 

[Fafnir]

I love Perk, and he's an absolute bargain right now.  Is there a better non-rookie contract out there?

For those saying Perk would be overpaid at the $10M range, you can look at it like this, just consider $2-4M of that back pay for his great contract now.  I would love for Perk to sign for cheap, but him and his agent have to know he's on a bargain contract now, they'll probably be looking to make up for it on the next contract.  Probably Perk's last (and only) big pay day, doubt they take a discount.

I love Perk, and while he's a great C, how effective is he really?  Sure he's a great match up against Shaq, Yao, and Dwight Howard, but there's not too many of those guys out there and the NBA has been moving further and further away from that low post style of game.  What happens when teams play guys like Dirk Nowitzke at Center with a PF that also plays outside?  Perk ain't gonna be too effective against those teams.

Perks a great puzzle piece, but not a great cornerstone.  How much do you really want to pay for a puzzle piece when the cornerstones are on their way out?

I'm confused, you seem to be making two arguments here. Are you just saying 10 million is your upper limit?

Either way the team should not ever look at it like this:

For those saying Perk would be overpaid at the $10M range, you can look at it like this, just consider $2-4M of that back pay for his great contract now.

You can't consider the contact as pay for previous years. It is for future years.

I'm not really making any arguments, just saying my opinion: he's underpaid now, and I think he'll be looking for a big pay day.  I see several people saying $10M is too much, if you think it's too much, I'm just offering another way too look at things.

And we're going to disagree if you think contracts are just for future years.  You don't think teams pad salaries to reward for the past?  Do you think the extension Steve Nash just got from the Suns had nothing to do with what he's done for them the past few seasons?  That Phoenix really predicts he'll be worth $11M per in 2011 and 2012 (when he's 36 and 37) when the competition for his services is the Knicks offering the veteran minimum?  He wasn't getting that money on the open market.  How come stars that stay with their teams sign some of their biggest contracts after there skills have already declined?  Happened to Ewing, Olajuwon, Reggie Miller, etc.  The money they were going to get on the open market was nowhere near what their teams gave them. 

How many of those contracts work out well for those teams? Pretty much none of them. Only Reggie continued to produce at a reasonable rate, just in fewer minutes.

[the_Bird]

To be nice, I would say that Perk is worth his weight in gold...but that would just be a ridiculous amount of gold.  So, that would be an extreme overstatement.

amazingly enough, perk weighs 280 pounds, which is 4,480 ounces.

gold is going for about $1,010 per ounce.

so a solid gold perk is worth $4,524,800.

his salary was $4,078,880.

so in terms of being worth his weight in gold, perk is being under paid. 

Nice analysis...   but gold is technically priced in "troy ounces," which are slightly bigger than a "regular" ounce (conversion is about 1.09 troy ounce per ounce). 

Means that he's even more underpaid!

[Tnerb02]

To be nice, I would say that Perk is worth his weight in gold...but that would just be a ridiculous amount of gold.  So, that would be an extreme overstatement.

amazingly enough, perk weighs 280 pounds, which is 4,480 ounces.

gold is going for about $1,010 per ounce.

so a solid gold perk is worth $4,524,800.

his salary was $4,078,880.

so in terms of being worth his weight in gold, perk is being under paid. 

Nice analysis...   but gold is technically priced in "troy ounces," which are slightly bigger than a "regular" ounce (conversion is about 1.09 troy ounce per ounce). 

Means that he's even more underpaid!

Don't tell that to big baby.

[jdub1660]

12 mil a year a year is pushing it, but 10 or less I would do. Perk is one of the players you just don't find that often. Whether or not he'd be good w/o the Big 3 is a pointless statement. ANY team with a great role player is nothing w/o their stars. Example: Bynum - not worth more than 12 a year, great, but worthless w/o Kobe, Gaysol etc.

Look around the league and pick out the best TRUE Big men C...

Shaq, Bynum, Big Z, Yao, Dwight, Okafor, EddyCurry, and Perk

I might have missed a few, but that's a rough sketch. Perk is a reliable big man to plug into the Center position and excel where we need him: Block shots, rebound, be big(not a soft C)
and OCCASIONALLY hit that 5-8 foot midrange shot.
Pay him his money

[bdm860]

I love Perk, and he's an absolute bargain right now.  Is there a better non-rookie contract out there?

For those saying Perk would be overpaid at the $10M range, you can look at it like this, just consider $2-4M of that back pay for his great contract now.  I would love for Perk to sign for cheap, but him and his agent have to know he's on a bargain contract now, they'll probably be looking to make up for it on the next contract.  Probably Perk's last (and only) big pay day, doubt they take a discount.

I love Perk, and while he's a great C, how effective is he really?  Sure he's a great match up against Shaq, Yao, and Dwight Howard, but there's not too many of those guys out there and the NBA has been moving further and further away from that low post style of game.  What happens when teams play guys like Dirk Nowitzke at Center with a PF that also plays outside?  Perk ain't gonna be too effective against those teams.

Perks a great puzzle piece, but not a great cornerstone.  How much do you really want to pay for a puzzle piece when the cornerstones are on their way out?

I'm confused, you seem to be making two arguments here. Are you just saying 10 million is your upper limit?

Either way the team should not ever look at it like this:

For those saying Perk would be overpaid at the $10M range, you can look at it like this, just consider $2-4M of that back pay for his great contract now.

You can't consider the contact as pay for previous years. It is for future years.

I'm not really making any arguments, just saying my opinion: he's underpaid now, and I think he'll be looking for a big pay day.  I see several people saying $10M is too much, if you think it's too much, I'm just offering another way too look at things.

And we're going to disagree if you think contracts are just for future years.  You don't think teams pad salaries to reward for the past?  Do you think the extension Steve Nash just got from the Suns had nothing to do with what he's done for them the past few seasons?  That Phoenix really predicts he'll be worth $11M per in 2011 and 2012 (when he's 36 and 37) when the competition for his services is the Knicks offering the veteran minimum?  He wasn't getting that money on the open market.  How come stars that stay with their teams sign some of their biggest contracts after there skills have already declined?  Happened to Ewing, Olajuwon, Reggie Miller, etc.  The money they were going to get on the open market was nowhere near what their teams gave them. 

How many of those contracts work out well for those teams? Pretty much none of them. Only Reggie continued to produce at a reasonable rate, just in fewer minutes.

We might have to disagree again, because it seemed to work out well for all those teams at the time.  Those teams didn't win championships, but they contended (loosely speaking). 

If Houston doesn't take care of Olajuwon, do you think Barkley and Pippen would have wanted to go there?  They were talked about as serious contenders in the late 90's, it didn't work out, but things probably would have been worse if they didn't reward Hakeem (unless of course they don't reward him, he walks, they suck, get the #1 and draft Duncan).

If the Knicks don't take care of Ewing, they don't sign Larry Johnson and Allan Houston, don't go to the Finals in '99.  After rewarding Ewing they were also considered contenders for the title in the late '90's.

If the Pacers don't take care of Reggie, they don't go the Finals in 2000 or the ECF in 2004.  Guys like Jermaine O'Neal see the Pacers don't take care of their players so he decides to go somewhere that does.  Pacers were also title contenders after rewarding Reggie (of course until a little brawl in Motown set them back and the team imploded).

I definitely think in all the cases I mentioned, it would have been worse if the teams didn't reward their players (unless of course they get lucky with the ping pong balls). After rewarding their players, all the teams I mentioned were contenders. 

People want to play in Phoenix.  And what do you know, they just took care of Steve Nash.  If they don't take care of their players, Nash plays out his final year, Grant Hill ends up signing with the Knicks (I know Hill re-signed first, but it seemed to be well known Nash was going to get a nice offer from the Suns), but Amare re-signs because all he cares about is the money.  Then Phoenix is stuck with Amare and 11 scrubs and end up looking like Memphis with Zach Randolph right now because agents won't help bring players there and none of the good veterans want to go somewhere where teams don't take care of their players.

There's a handful of agents that control the majority of players.  I don't know who Perks agent is, but I bet he represents some other players too.  If the C's don't reward Perk for his past performance, do you think his agent is going to help sign another of his players if the money is equal somewhere else?  There's a lot of back scratching that goes on in the league.

Players and agents notice when teams don't take care of their players.  I really think it effects future signings and dealings.  I really do.



(Disclaimer, everything I mentioned above is loosely put together, don't know exactly when players were extended and the other transactions happened, so some things may be a little off, but those are just logistics and my point and stance remains the same).


Edit - just looked up his agent, Arn Tellem, controls 32 players (his firm controls about 55 altogether it looks like), and is ranked the #1 agent by hoopshype.  Makes me think even more Perk is going to get his money.  And a guy that controls this much talent you want on your side.
http://hoopshype.com/agents/arn_tellem.htm
http://www.wmgllc.com/

[PosImpos]

Look around the league and pick out the best TRUE Big men C...

Shaq, Bynum, Big Z, Yao, Dwight, Okafor, EddyCurry, and Perk

Um...why did you include Eddy Curry in that list? 

In fact, you're really missing a lot of the better big guys and including some strange choices (Bynum, Curry, and even Perk don't really count as the 'best' true centers).

[jambr380]

Look around the league and pick out the best TRUE Big men C...

Shaq, Bynum, Big Z, Yao, Dwight, Okafor, EddyCurry, and Perk

Um...why did you include Eddy Curry in that list? 

In fact, you're really missing a lot of the better big guys and including some strange choices (Bynum, Curry, and even Perk don't really count as the 'best' true centers).

Haha, laughed at the Curry thing, too...looking at that list, it makes me think that Perk is really the 2nd best center in the NBA (since Yao is out indefinitely). I know this is not the case, since there are many PF/C like: Amare, Duncan, Nene, Boozer, Aldridge, etc. who are not on the above list that I would rank higher than Perk, but I do agree Perk is in line for a big pay day, and I am not that crazy about it (I LOVE how he took a discount to play in Boston- I don't want to think of him as a guy who is all about the $$).

[hankfinkel]

You really need to go top-down for what the Cs will sign any player for, and for how long.  And the premise I think is this: the Cs want to have large amounts of cap room in 2012 preferably enough to even sign 2 max contract guys.  That summer Chris Paul, Deron Williams, and Dwight Howard can all opt out.  Carmelo Anthony could be unrestricted if he exercises his option in 2011.  And, of course, if Durant wanted to play out the string to get out of OKC, and just go for the qualifying offer in 2011-12, he could be an unrestricted free agent in 2012.  Now not all those players will likely be available but some will, and other very good players will likely be free agents. 

So KG and Rasheed are up in the summer of 2012, and there is no way RA gets more than 2 years on an extension next summer, so even if resigned he'll be up in 2012.  I sincerely doubt the Cs sign any free agent next summer for longer than 2 years, and likely no big contracts in 2011.  Although some S&T for a big name is possible in 2011 if for example OKC thinks they'll lose Durant anyway in 2011 or 2012 and takes Rondo, Perk, draft picks, etc. in exchange.

So the 3 major names who could be on the team pasr 2012 are Rondo, Perk, and Pierce.

Rondo will be a difficult call because if the Cs see him as a top-5 point guard, they may just need to pay him whatever the market will yield, but I suspect they'll even hold the line there to what they think is his value, or perhaps go a little beyond.  Pierce is going to be a very interesting because if he exercises his option next summer and is unrestricted in 2011, how much do pay a guy (and for how long) who is in the pantheon of Celtics greats, but will be 34 at the start of the 2011 season?  The Cs I imagine would like him to bridge to the new generation, and hel draw some free agents in 2012, but going more than 3 years seems unwise and would Pierce take $10M per at this stage of his career?  Would he demand to be up more like $15M?

After the Rondo and Pierce contract situations are clarified, and you get a pulse on what free agency in 2012 is going to looks like, then you decide what to do with Perk.  If Rondo and Pierce are making reasonable money, or if one left, you may be able to overpay Perk slightly (I put his value around $7M/year so that's where the judgment starts, and I would never pay him $10M+) because he is a good solid defensive NBA center and a known quantity, and if the free agents you are going to target supplement a core of Rondo, Perk, and for 1 to 2 years an old Pierce, this may make sense.  However, if Rondo and Pierce got top dollar you may decide Perk can not be signed even at a decent market value because that would prevent the signing of a star player in 2012.  And if Dwight Howard is your 2012 target and you feel good about your chances, then you make due with whoever at center in 2011-12 and wave goodbye to Perk.

[billysan]

While I love Perk as a Celtic and want to keep him in green for life, I have a different view than some of the previous posters in this thread. Perk cannot be compared to many of the centers mentioned above with any real clarity for one huge reason. Just my opinion, but he is not a 'franchise center'. Solid, reliable, a starter on over half the teams in the league no doubt, but not a franchise player.


Unfortunately for most of the others mentioned above, only a few are true franchise centers. Dwight Howard certainly fits that description. Chris Kaman? Okafor? Chandler? These guys are grossly overpaid. Granted the position they play is difficult to fill, but they do not under any circumstance deserve to have a team built around them ala Tim Duncan or Shaq. Even Al Jefferson could be considered more of a franchise center and he is a PF playing out of position.


Perk is a great guy and an asset. If the FA market determines he is worth 10 million per in a couple of years....I let him walk and congratulate him. If we are paying that kind of money, we better have guy averaging a double double. Not just with potential, but doing it. A player making that kind of money should be dominant in some aspect of his game. I guess an argument could be made that Perk is an excellent defender in the post, but dominant?


I think if we offer Perk 5 years and top him out at 8 million in years 4-5 with incentives for games played, he stays with us. Anything more, especially in the 10 million range is just too much.

[greenwise]

This is the Scouting report of Perk in 2001  :

"Scouting Report: Watching Perkins in action, it doesn't take long to realize that you're seeing someone special; someone who's going to be a very good college and/or NBA player. His broad shoulders and mature physique are able to force his will on defenders on the low blocks. He is an excellent back-to-the-basket center that has at least a half dozen scoring moves on the inside. Perkins has a jump-hook that he could hit with his eyes closed, a nice up-and-under move and instinctive footwork. He looks like he's already been to the Pete Newell Big Man Camp, if you get my drift. He's an excellent rebounder, an above average shot-blocker and his hands are as good as Elton Brand's. Perkins shoots the ball with good touch from 15 feet and in. Basically, he's just got all of the tools, the body and the ability to dominate when he so desires to. "

http://arizona.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=50596

Perkins is only 24!! Every year he's improved his conditioning and his offensive arsenal. He's finally getting the respect of coaches and referees, avoiding quick fouls and he's also developped his identity as one of the team leaders, being more vocal in Playoff time.

I would offer Perk the same kind of extension I would offer to Rondo and I consider them as the main pieces for the Celtics future. I think he would accept a 5 year /$45 million from Danny if he had that offer on his mailbox now.

With Rondo, Perk, Daniels, Baby and maybe Walker the future of the team after the departure of the veterans in some years wouldn't be so dark...

[Thruthelookingglass]

I would offer Perk the same kind of extension I would offer to Rondo and I consider them as the main pieces for the Celtics future. I think he would accept a 5 year /$45 million from Danny if he had that offer on his mailbox now.

With Rondo, Perk, Daniels, Baby and maybe Walker the future of the team after the departure of the veterans in some years wouldn't be so dark...

Exactly.  Perk and Rondo are the cornerstones for the future.  Discussion of how much to pay Perk (and Rondo) is difficult given the sharply changing value of free agents this year (and probably the next couple.  I can't say what salary he will deserve when the time is right, but I do hope that Danny fights the urge to lowball Perk and Rondo.  These are two guys we need committed for the long term.

All that said, the discussions of where Perk fits relative to other players is indeed quite informative.  For instance, is Perk as valuable to the C's as Odom is to the Lakers?   Is he easier or harder to replace?  IMHO, I think some people here are underestimating our Beast.

[greenwise]

Perk is a beast!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oXdbBQ-3Rxs

[crownsy]

This is exactly why I expect us to be hearing Perk's name a lot in trade rumors next summer, if not even this year's deadline.  He is going to price himself off the C's in 2 years, and Danny will likely look to see what he can get for him.

I think that would be crazy. Perk at $10 million per for 5 years beyond his current contract is a bargain. The C's would end up going a ong time trying to find another replacement for a starting center position that is as good as perk on both sides of the ball for the money they could just pay him.

Perk is not nearly effective once KG and the rest of the big 3 are gone.  They can get away with having an offensive liability in there right now, because of the talent around him, but once they are gone, his weaknesses will start showing up even more.  For $4 million, that is fine, but you need a $10 million player to be more of an impact player on both ends of the floor. 

The way to rebuild is not by giving role players $10 million a year.  It is by maintaining financial flexibility, not locking yourself into terrible contracts, and spending the money on players who are not liabilities in part of their games...plus a lot of luck.

And don't get me wrong, I love Perk, but he is simply not a $10 million player.

With that said, I think they only trade him if they are able to get good value for him.  Otherwise, they will let him finish out his contract, and make one more run with him, and then if he is not willing to take a home-town discount, try to sign and trade him or just let him walk.  Unless he makes dramatic improvements in his offensive game (not to mention his shoulder stops popping out), I would be absolutely shocked if he is in Boston after 2011, unless he is making less than $8 million per year (and that might even be high).

And there is where we will have to agree to disagree because last year in the playoffs without KG Perkins showed he is more than just a role player. Given what people are making in the league and the skill level of the center talent, perk will be a bargain at $10 million, with or without the Big Three.

Again, we'll just have to agree to disagree with that.

How did he show that?

He played great tough defense and scored as a dump off option/ last resort near the rim.

That's what Chris has correctly labeled him, a defensive role player. Role player doesn't = non-starter.

[nickagneta]

This is exactly why I expect us to be hearing Perk's name a lot in trade rumors next summer, if not even this year's deadline.  He is going to price himself off the C's in 2 years, and Danny will likely look to see what he can get for him.

I think that would be crazy. Perk at $10 million per for 5 years beyond his current contract is a bargain. The C's would end up going a ong time trying to find another replacement for a starting center position that is as good as perk on both sides of the ball for the money they could just pay him.

Perk is not nearly effective once KG and the rest of the big 3 are gone.  They can get away with having an offensive liability in there right now, because of the talent around him, but once they are gone, his weaknesses will start showing up even more.  For $4 million, that is fine, but you need a $10 million player to be more of an impact player on both ends of the floor. 

The way to rebuild is not by giving role players $10 million a year.  It is by maintaining financial flexibility, not locking yourself into terrible contracts, and spending the money on players who are not liabilities in part of their games...plus a lot of luck.

And don't get me wrong, I love Perk, but he is simply not a $10 million player.

With that said, I think they only trade him if they are able to get good value for him.  Otherwise, they will let him finish out his contract, and make one more run with him, and then if he is not willing to take a home-town discount, try to sign and trade him or just let him walk.  Unless he makes dramatic improvements in his offensive game (not to mention his shoulder stops popping out), I would be absolutely shocked if he is in Boston after 2011, unless he is making less than $8 million per year (and that might even be high).

And there is where we will have to agree to disagree because last year in the playoffs without KG Perkins showed he is more than just a role player. Given what people are making in the league and the skill level of the center talent, perk will be a bargain at $10 million, with or without the Big Three.

Again, we'll just have to agree to disagree with that.

How did he show that?

He played great tough defense and scored as a dump off option/ last resort near the rim.

That's what Chris has correctly labeled him, a defensive role player. Role player doesn't = non-starter.

Were we watching the same set of games?

Very often Park was fed the ball as a down low option, in fact, at times when they had trouble scoring it was Perk down low with his hook that they went to. Perk went for 14 or more points in half the games he played in during the playoffs having to go against two very, very good defensive centers in Noah and Howard.

And, during those games, he was far from a last resort dump it down on the drive or let him get garbage points player. Maybe you are remembering 2008 but I specifically remember Perk being the C's only low post option during the playoffs and seeing them go to him often.