Perkins has little skills

[KungPoweChicken]

A 64.3% season from the floor (56.3% career) averaging 12 and 8 and the guy has little skills?! Give me as many of those guys as you want. Shaq never could guard a mobile big man that could shoot from the outside either and he seemed to make up for it in other areas. If you think that Perk is the problem on this team then you really shouldn't put any resumes into the league to be a scout or GM...

Are people really comparing Perkins to Shaq? I've seen it all on Celticsblog.

[Donoghus]

A 64.3% season from the floor (56.3% career) averaging 12 and 8 and the guy has little skills?! Give me as many of those guys as you want. Shaq never could guard a mobile big man that could shoot from the outside either and he seemed to make up for it in other areas. If you think that Perk is the problem on this team then you really shouldn't put any resumes into the league to be a scout or GM...

Are people really comparing Perkins to Shaq? I've seen it all on Celticsblog.

Only one aspect of Shaq's game.  I don't think the poster is insinuating that Perkins is anywhere near the level Shaq was but simply comparing each's abilities to guard a big man from the outside. 

[BballTim]

Some people have responded like the 15 players I listed can't touch Perk's jock (pure homerism at its finest). See, I guess that's where we differ. I would gladly take any of those 15 guys, instead of Perk.

  And you'd be baffled to understand why we weren't as good with them in spite of their breathtaking scoring skills.

The whole post was based on how Perk has very, very limited skills. (Sure, Perk dominates his role, just like Fisher dominates his role on the Lakers). But that doesn't mean he is a good center. He is a solid role player at best. All 15 of the players I listed have a better skill set than Perk. If you cannot see that, then I don't know what you're watching.

  Derek Fisher dominates his role? Is it 2004 again?

If you think Perk is a beast on this team, do you have any idea how big of a beast Andrew Bogut would be here? How about Brook Lopez or Joakim Noah or Chris Kaman? Perk just isn't as skilled as any of those guys (including the other guys from the 15), no matter how you slice it.

  You don't have any idea how much LESS of a beast all of those guys would be on the Celts if they were the 4th or 5th option in an offense. Plus you're ignoring the defensive side of the game, probably realizing after watching in '08 that defense doesn't matter on the Celts, just more skilled offensive players.

[KungPoweChicken]

A 64.3% season from the floor (56.3% career) averaging 12 and 8 and the guy has little skills?! Give me as many of those guys as you want. Shaq never could guard a mobile big man that could shoot from the outside either and he seemed to make up for it in other areas. If you think that Perk is the problem on this team then you really shouldn't put any resumes into the league to be a scout or GM...

Are people really comparing Perkins to Shaq? I've seen it all on Celticsblog.

Only one aspect of Shaq's game.  I don't think the poster is insinuating that Perkins is anywhere near the level Shaq was but simply comparing each's abilities to guard a big man from the outside. 

Shaq made up for his inability to guard mobile big men by being the perhaps the best player ever. How does Perk make up for it? He makes up for it by being a "solid team defender."



Unfortunately, some people have jumped on certain parts of my post and now are picking at me, which is usually the case here. I never said Perk was "the problem" here, or that he is the reason why we are losing. I said he is less skilled than about half the big men in the league, making him a middle of the road king of guy. And if Perk has any value at the end of this season (which judging by this board you'd think he could land you a perennial All-Star), I would trade him for a future All-Star caliber PF or wing. Someone to pair with Rondo, while we rebuild.

[pearljammer10]

Awful thread. Maybe there are a few people that are overrating Perk but people, (OP especially), are greatly UNDER RATING his defense. He is a phenominal defender down low and we have seen this when he plays opposing centers.

Perk is never going to be a guy to put up big numbers or run an offense through like a Shaq or a Yao Ming (when playing), but he is going to give you what you need out of a center. He is averaging almost 13 points a game while shooting around 63% from the floor. His offensive moves have improved each and every year he has been in the league. I am now ok with him getting a touch and taking a defender to the basket... Like I said it won't happen every time and a system will never be run through him, but he does provide a nice option.

He may not be as coordinated as quick or as athletic as other centers but he still can play ball. He has proven that this season. And this is what...His 7th! NBA season and he is still only what...24 or 25! Come on now he still has a lot of years to play in the NBA and who better to learn from than KG and Cliff Ray. If the All - Star game wasnt a popularity contest I bet he would be right up there at the top for voting.

[wdleehi]

Why don't we compare Perk to recent C's with skill sets closer to his.


I am talking Ben Wallace and Mutumbo. 

All three are good defenders and rebounders.  All three were weak offensively. 


All three were top Cs in the NBA because of their defense and rebounding.  Two won titles as important role players on defensive teams.  The other one made it to the finals on a weak team.

[bucknersrevenge]

This thread is an abomination.

Yeah "Perk isn't skilled..." Oh wait DEFENSIVE skills don't count. Ahhh...got it. Yeah that makes sense because defense isn't part of the game. Not like we won a title with defense as our calling card or anything. Who needs a player with exceptional defensive skills?? That's just silly...

[Donoghus]

A 64.3% season from the floor (56.3% career) averaging 12 and 8 and the guy has little skills?! Give me as many of those guys as you want. Shaq never could guard a mobile big man that could shoot from the outside either and he seemed to make up for it in other areas. If you think that Perk is the problem on this team then you really shouldn't put any resumes into the league to be a scout or GM...

Are people really comparing Perkins to Shaq? I've seen it all on Celticsblog.

Only one aspect of Shaq's game.  I don't think the poster is insinuating that Perkins is anywhere near the level Shaq was but simply comparing each's abilities to guard a big man from the outside. 

Shaq made up for his inability to guard mobile big men by being the perhaps the best player ever. How does Perk make up for it? He makes up for it by being a "solid team defender."



Unfortunately, some people have jumped on certain parts of my post and now are picking at me, which is usually the case here. I never said Perk was "the problem" here, or that he is the reason why we are losing. I said he is less skilled than about half the big men in the league, making him a middle of the road king of guy. And if Perk has any value at the end of this season (which judging by this board you'd think he could land you a perennial All-Star), I would trade him for a future All-Star caliber PF or wing. Someone to pair with Rondo, while we rebuild.

Well, he makes up for the inability to guard mobile big men outside with his ability to deftly guard a big man in the paint.  The guy can rebound.  His shooting percentage is over 60% (find me 15 big men with that).  The guy can average over 10 points a game for you as primarily the 4th or 5th scoring option on the floor.  He does well to compensate in other aspects of the game.

Not everyone disagreeing with you is doing it out of "homerism".  People are pointing out some very valid points of Perkins' game that should illustrate that he has more than "little skills".

[moiso]

Why don't we compare Perk to recent C's with skill sets closer to his.


I am talking Ben Wallace and Mutumbo. 

All three are good defenders and rebounders.  All three were weak offensively. 


All three were top Cs in the NBA because of their defense and rebounding.  Two won titles as important role players on defensive teams.  The other one made it to the finals on a weak team.

Good comparison.  Though I'd rate Perk as a far better offensive player than those two, and not as good defensively.  Perk is an excellent defender, those were two of the most dominant defenders of all time.  You make a good point though- why compare him to an offense only guy like Bogut?

[KungPoweChicken]

A 64.3% season from the floor (56.3% career) averaging 12 and 8 and the guy has little skills?! Give me as many of those guys as you want. Shaq never could guard a mobile big man that could shoot from the outside either and he seemed to make up for it in other areas. If you think that Perk is the problem on this team then you really shouldn't put any resumes into the league to be a scout or GM...

Are people really comparing Perkins to Shaq? I've seen it all on Celticsblog.

Only one aspect of Shaq's game.  I don't think the poster is insinuating that Perkins is anywhere near the level Shaq was but simply comparing each's abilities to guard a big man from the outside. 

Shaq made up for his inability to guard mobile big men by being the perhaps the best player ever. How does Perk make up for it? He makes up for it by being a "solid team defender."



Unfortunately, some people have jumped on certain parts of my post and now are picking at me, which is usually the case here. I never said Perk was "the problem" here, or that he is the reason why we are losing. I said he is less skilled than about half the big men in the league, making him a middle of the road king of guy. And if Perk has any value at the end of this season (which judging by this board you'd think he could land you a perennial All-Star), I would trade him for a future All-Star caliber PF or wing. Someone to pair with Rondo, while we rebuild.

Well, he makes up for the inability to guard mobile big men outside with his ability to deftly guard a big man in the paint.  The guy can rebound.  His shooting percentage is over 60% (find me 15 big men with that).  The guy can average over 10 points a game for you as primarily the 4th or 5th scoring option on the floor.  He does well to compensate in other aspects of the game.

Not everyone disagreeing with you is doing it out of "homerism".  People are pointing out some very valid points of Perkins' game that should illustrate that he has more than "little skills".

Any of the fifteen centers I listed, if they were playing with the big three, would be one of the leaders in field goal percentage. some people act like Perk is doing something special with his shooting. He more or less stands in the paint and waits for the pass from Garnett or Rondo so he can lay it in. 58% of Perks shots are close range, and 12% of his shots are dunks. That's a total of 70% of his shots being bunnies. You can thank the four All-Stars he plays with his field goal percentage. If the defense actually focused on Perk, he would be absolutely useless on offense. Furthermore, only 2% of Perkins shot attempts are tips (one of the worst for big men), which tells you he is not a very active guy around the rim. 10% of Bogut's shots are tips, and 17% of Noah's shots are tips.

Now I understand. It's not all about the offense. I agree Perkins is a solid defender, and he may even be a good interior defender. But I will not say he is very good or even a great defender. His strong point is putting a body on physical specimens like Dwight Howard. I give Perk his due when it comes to that. But he is still incredibly slow, and he misses rotations quite often in the team defense. I will not acknowledge Perk as being a great defender like some people seem to do.

[BballTim]

A 64.3% season from the floor (56.3% career) averaging 12 and 8 and the guy has little skills?! Give me as many of those guys as you want. Shaq never could guard a mobile big man that could shoot from the outside either and he seemed to make up for it in other areas. If you think that Perk is the problem on this team then you really shouldn't put any resumes into the league to be a scout or GM...

Are people really comparing Perkins to Shaq? I've seen it all on Celticsblog.

Only one aspect of Shaq's game.  I don't think the poster is insinuating that Perkins is anywhere near the level Shaq was but simply comparing each's abilities to guard a big man from the outside. 

Shaq made up for his inability to guard mobile big men by being the perhaps the best player ever. How does Perk make up for it? He makes up for it by being a "solid team defender."



Unfortunately, some people have jumped on certain parts of my post and now are picking at me, which is usually the case here. I never said Perk was "the problem" here, or that he is the reason why we are losing. I said he is less skilled than about half the big men in the league, making him a middle of the road king of guy. And if Perk has any value at the end of this season (which judging by this board you'd think he could land you a perennial All-Star), I would trade him for a future All-Star caliber PF or wing. Someone to pair with Rondo, while we rebuild.

Well, he makes up for the inability to guard mobile big men outside with his ability to deftly guard a big man in the paint.  The guy can rebound.  His shooting percentage is over 60% (find me 15 big men with that).  The guy can average over 10 points a game for you as primarily the 4th or 5th scoring option on the floor.  He does well to compensate in other aspects of the game.

Not everyone disagreeing with you is doing it out of "homerism".  People are pointing out some very valid points of Perkins' game that should illustrate that he has more than "little skills".

Any of the fifteen centers I listed, if they were playing with the big three, would be one of the leaders in field goal percentage. some people act like Perk is doing something special with his shooting. He more or less stands in the paint and waits for the pass from Garnett or Rondo so he can lay it in. 58% of Perks shots are close range, and 12% of his shots are dunks. That's a total of 70% of his shots being bunnies. You can thank the four All-Stars he plays with his field goal percentage. If the defense actually focused on Perk, he would be absolutely useless on offense. Furthermore, only 2% of Perkins shot attempts are tips (one of the worst for big men), which tells you he is not a very active guy around the rim. 10% of Bogut's shots are tips, and 17% of Noah's shots are tips.

  One of the reason Perk doesn't get a lot of tips is because we get back on defense instead of crashing the offensive glass. Just curious, but when you were looking up those stats did you notice that Perk hits 73% of his close shots while those two "skilled" players are hitting them at 41% and 51% respectively? (aside: is this the first time anyone's called Noah skilled since he joined the nba?)

Now I understand. It's not all about the offense. I agree Perkins is a solid defender, and he may even be a good interior defender. But I will not say he is very good or even a great defender. His strong point is putting a body on physical specimens like Dwight Howard. I give Perk his due when it comes to that. But he is still incredibly slow, and he misses rotations quite often in the team defense. I will not acknowledge Perk as being a great defender like some people seem to do.

  Most of the opposing coaches seem to have noticed that he's one of the best defensive centers in the league despite your misgivings. And, just by coincidence, our path to the title would probably include those physical specimens (DH, Shaq, Bynum) that Perk excels against.

[KungPoweChicken]

A 64.3% season from the floor (56.3% career) averaging 12 and 8 and the guy has little skills?! Give me as many of those guys as you want. Shaq never could guard a mobile big man that could shoot from the outside either and he seemed to make up for it in other areas. If you think that Perk is the problem on this team then you really shouldn't put any resumes into the league to be a scout or GM...

Are people really comparing Perkins to Shaq? I've seen it all on Celticsblog.

Only one aspect of Shaq's game.  I don't think the poster is insinuating that Perkins is anywhere near the level Shaq was but simply comparing each's abilities to guard a big man from the outside. 

Shaq made up for his inability to guard mobile big men by being the perhaps the best player ever. How does Perk make up for it? He makes up for it by being a "solid team defender."



Unfortunately, some people have jumped on certain parts of my post and now are picking at me, which is usually the case here. I never said Perk was "the problem" here, or that he is the reason why we are losing. I said he is less skilled than about half the big men in the league, making him a middle of the road king of guy. And if Perk has any value at the end of this season (which judging by this board you'd think he could land you a perennial All-Star), I would trade him for a future All-Star caliber PF or wing. Someone to pair with Rondo, while we rebuild.

Well, he makes up for the inability to guard mobile big men outside with his ability to deftly guard a big man in the paint.  The guy can rebound.  His shooting percentage is over 60% (find me 15 big men with that).  The guy can average over 10 points a game for you as primarily the 4th or 5th scoring option on the floor.  He does well to compensate in other aspects of the game.

Not everyone disagreeing with you is doing it out of "homerism".  People are pointing out some very valid points of Perkins' game that should illustrate that he has more than "little skills".

Any of the fifteen centers I listed, if they were playing with the big three, would be one of the leaders in field goal percentage. some people act like Perk is doing something special with his shooting. He more or less stands in the paint and waits for the pass from Garnett or Rondo so he can lay it in. 58% of Perks shots are close range, and 12% of his shots are dunks. That's a total of 70% of his shots being bunnies. You can thank the four All-Stars he plays with his field goal percentage. If the defense actually focused on Perk, he would be absolutely useless on offense. Furthermore, only 2% of Perkins shot attempts are tips (one of the worst for big men), which tells you he is not a very active guy around the rim. 10% of Bogut's shots are tips, and 17% of Noah's shots are tips.

  One of the reason Perk doesn't get a lot of tips is because we get back on defense instead of crashing the offensive glass. Just curious, but when you were looking up those stats did you notice that Perk hits 73% of his close shots while those two "skilled" players are hitting them at 41% and 51% respectively? (aside: is this the first time anyone's called Noah skilled since he joined the nba?)

Now I understand. It's not all about the offense. I agree Perkins is a solid defender, and he may even be a good interior defender. But I will not say he is very good or even a great defender. His strong point is putting a body on physical specimens like Dwight Howard. I give Perk his due when it comes to that. But he is still incredibly slow, and he misses rotations quite often in the team defense. I will not acknowledge Perk as being a great defender like some people seem to do.

  Most of the opposing coaches seem to have noticed that he's one of the best defensive centers in the league despite your misgivings. And, just by coincidence, our path to the title would probably include those physical specimens (DH, Shaq, Bynum) that Perk excels against.

In a nutshell, most of Perk's close range shots are uncontested bunnies. Bogut and Noah don't have that luxury because neither play with three future Hall of Famers.

[Toine43]

I agree that the op is ridiculous. One more great thing about having Perk, he basically assures that the Celtics beat Orlando if healthy. He just completely neutralizes Howard, which makes the Celtics heavy favorites in any game against the Magic, in my opinion.

[BballTim]

A 64.3% season from the floor (56.3% career) averaging 12 and 8 and the guy has little skills?! Give me as many of those guys as you want. Shaq never could guard a mobile big man that could shoot from the outside either and he seemed to make up for it in other areas. If you think that Perk is the problem on this team then you really shouldn't put any resumes into the league to be a scout or GM...

Are people really comparing Perkins to Shaq? I've seen it all on Celticsblog.

Only one aspect of Shaq's game.  I don't think the poster is insinuating that Perkins is anywhere near the level Shaq was but simply comparing each's abilities to guard a big man from the outside. 

Shaq made up for his inability to guard mobile big men by being the perhaps the best player ever. How does Perk make up for it? He makes up for it by being a "solid team defender."



Unfortunately, some people have jumped on certain parts of my post and now are picking at me, which is usually the case here. I never said Perk was "the problem" here, or that he is the reason why we are losing. I said he is less skilled than about half the big men in the league, making him a middle of the road king of guy. And if Perk has any value at the end of this season (which judging by this board you'd think he could land you a perennial All-Star), I would trade him for a future All-Star caliber PF or wing. Someone to pair with Rondo, while we rebuild.

Well, he makes up for the inability to guard mobile big men outside with his ability to deftly guard a big man in the paint.  The guy can rebound.  His shooting percentage is over 60% (find me 15 big men with that).  The guy can average over 10 points a game for you as primarily the 4th or 5th scoring option on the floor.  He does well to compensate in other aspects of the game.

Not everyone disagreeing with you is doing it out of "homerism".  People are pointing out some very valid points of Perkins' game that should illustrate that he has more than "little skills".

Any of the fifteen centers I listed, if they were playing with the big three, would be one of the leaders in field goal percentage. some people act like Perk is doing something special with his shooting. He more or less stands in the paint and waits for the pass from Garnett or Rondo so he can lay it in. 58% of Perks shots are close range, and 12% of his shots are dunks. That's a total of 70% of his shots being bunnies. You can thank the four All-Stars he plays with his field goal percentage. If the defense actually focused on Perk, he would be absolutely useless on offense. Furthermore, only 2% of Perkins shot attempts are tips (one of the worst for big men), which tells you he is not a very active guy around the rim. 10% of Bogut's shots are tips, and 17% of Noah's shots are tips.

  One of the reason Perk doesn't get a lot of tips is because we get back on defense instead of crashing the offensive glass. Just curious, but when you were looking up those stats did you notice that Perk hits 73% of his close shots while those two "skilled" players are hitting them at 41% and 51% respectively? (aside: is this the first time anyone's called Noah skilled since he joined the nba?)

Now I understand. It's not all about the offense. I agree Perkins is a solid defender, and he may even be a good interior defender. But I will not say he is very good or even a great defender. His strong point is putting a body on physical specimens like Dwight Howard. I give Perk his due when it comes to that. But he is still incredibly slow, and he misses rotations quite often in the team defense. I will not acknowledge Perk as being a great defender like some people seem to do.

  Most of the opposing coaches seem to have noticed that he's one of the best defensive centers in the league despite your misgivings. And, just by coincidence, our path to the title would probably include those physical specimens (DH, Shaq, Bynum) that Perk excels against.

In a nutshell, most of Perk's close range shots are uncontested bunnies. Bogut and Noah don't have that luxury because neither play with three future Hall of Famers.

  No, Perk hits a high percentage of his shots when he's going against opposing centers. You can see him do it in almost every game he plays. And you should ponder the fact that he's having his best shooting year since the big three got here even though they're clearly having their (combined) least effective year.

[EJPLAYA]

A 64.3% season from the floor (56.3% career) averaging 12 and 8 and the guy has little skills?! Give me as many of those guys as you want. Shaq never could guard a mobile big man that could shoot from the outside either and he seemed to make up for it in other areas. If you think that Perk is the problem on this team then you really shouldn't put any resumes into the league to be a scout or GM...

Are people really comparing Perkins to Shaq? I've seen it all on Celticsblog.

Only one aspect of Shaq's game.  I don't think the poster is insinuating that Perkins is anywhere near the level Shaq was but simply comparing each's abilities to guard a big man from the outside. 

Shaq made up for his inability to guard mobile big men by being the perhaps the best player ever. How does Perk make up for it? He makes up for it by being a "solid team defender."



Unfortunately, some people have jumped on certain parts of my post and now are picking at me, which is usually the case here. I never said Perk was "the problem" here, or that he is the reason why we are losing. I said he is less skilled than about half the big men in the league, making him a middle of the road king of guy. And if Perk has any value at the end of this season (which judging by this board you'd think he could land you a perennial All-Star), I would trade him for a future All-Star caliber PF or wing. Someone to pair with Rondo, while we rebuild.

Well, he makes up for the inability to guard mobile big men outside with his ability to deftly guard a big man in the paint.  The guy can rebound.  His shooting percentage is over 60% (find me 15 big men with that).  The guy can average over 10 points a game for you as primarily the 4th or 5th scoring option on the floor.  He does well to compensate in other aspects of the game.

Not everyone disagreeing with you is doing it out of "homerism".  People are pointing out some very valid points of Perkins' game that should illustrate that he has more than "little skills".

Any of the fifteen centers I listed, if they were playing with the big three, would be one of the leaders in field goal percentage. some people act like Perk is doing something special with his shooting. He more or less stands in the paint and waits for the pass from Garnett or Rondo so he can lay it in. 58% of Perks shots are close range, and 12% of his shots are dunks. That's a total of 70% of his shots being bunnies. You can thank the four All-Stars he plays with his field goal percentage. If the defense actually focused on Perk, he would be absolutely useless on offense. Furthermore, only 2% of Perkins shot attempts are tips (one of the worst for big men), which tells you he is not a very active guy around the rim. 10% of Bogut's shots are tips, and 17% of Noah's shots are tips.

  One of the reason Perk doesn't get a lot of tips is because we get back on defense instead of crashing the offensive glass. Just curious, but when you were looking up those stats did you notice that Perk hits 73% of his close shots while those two "skilled" players are hitting them at 41% and 51% respectively? (aside: is this the first time anyone's called Noah skilled since he joined the nba?)

Now I understand. It's not all about the offense. I agree Perkins is a solid defender, and he may even be a good interior defender. But I will not say he is very good or even a great defender. His strong point is putting a body on physical specimens like Dwight Howard. I give Perk his due when it comes to that. But he is still incredibly slow, and he misses rotations quite often in the team defense. I will not acknowledge Perk as being a great defender like some people seem to do.

  Most of the opposing coaches seem to have noticed that he's one of the best defensive centers in the league despite your misgivings. And, just by coincidence, our path to the title would probably include those physical specimens (DH, Shaq, Bynum) that Perk excels against.

In a nutshell, most of Perk's close range shots are uncontested bunnies. Bogut and Noah don't have that luxury because neither play with three future Hall of Famers.

I was sitting there yesterday working with my 12 yr old daughter and shared a piece of wisdom with her about shot selection you may have never learned. I'll share it with you as well. The BEST shot in basketball is from 2 feet right up off the glass. (Those "bunnies" you are referring to) Perk has the "skill" to put himself in the right position to be able to put those in. If it was so easy, why isn't everyone in the NBA shooting 64% from the field? Why does your beloved Noah shoot only 47% from the floor. Isn't he smart enough to realize that unskilled players like him only have to wait around the rim and collect bunnies?!

There is a reason Perk is leading the NBA in FG%. There is a reason the only other two above 60% are Dwight Howard who is an athletic freak of nature and indeed does only put in bunnies, and Mark Gasol who is 3-4 inches taller than him and only shoots down low as well. It is because he knows his skill set and uses that to his advantage.

I also disagree with your assessment that most are bunnies. He puts a lot of them in reversing the ball under the basket or creatively turning in his move to let the rim help ward off the defender. If they were all just dunks then you'd have a point, but the guy can finish. If he couldn't he'd be BBD...