Trading Perk to get younger doesn't make sense to me

[mahonedog88]

I see this new rumor out there that supposedly we're offering Perk and the number 19 in order to get a young piece to add to our core.

I understand Perk is injured and there is a POSSIBILITY he may not be the same from his injury and no one seems to be sure when he'll be back...but he's 24 isn't he?

If you want to trade Perk, then sure, do it.  But don't say its too help our young core...cause as far as I was concerned, he was a part of that young core.

[Evantime34]

I see this new rumor out there that supposedly we're offering Perk and the number 19 in order to get a young piece to add to our core.

I understand Perk is injured and there is a POSSIBILITY he may not be the same from his injury and no one seems to be sure when he'll be back...but he's 24 isn't he?

If you want to trade Perk, then sure, do it.  But don't say its too help our young core...cause as far as I was concerned, he was a part of that young core.

What if they are considering trading Perk because they believe they have one more year left to compete. If he's injured during that year why not trade him?

[PosImpos]

Perk is an elite role player at best.  Ideally you want your young core to be made up of players who are stars or who have star potential.

So from a rebuilding standpoint, it makes sense to trade Perk to try to get potential stars.

[Eddie20]

I see this new rumor out there that supposedly we're offering Perk and the number 19 in order to get a young piece to add to our core.

I understand Perk is injured and there is a POSSIBILITY he may not be the same from his injury and no one seems to be sure when he'll be back...but he's 24 isn't he?

If you want to trade Perk, then sure, do it.  But don't say its too help our young core...cause as far as I was concerned, he was a part of that young core.

He's actually 26. Aside from the knee injury he has also had some lingering shoulder injuries. And when you consider how physical he plays, giving punishment as well as receiving, perhaps there are some flags that he could be an injury risk down the line. Then you factor in that his ceiling just isn't that high (will always be a liability offensively) with the fact that his contract expires next summer (will likely be looking for a significant pay increase) and I think it does make sense to deal him now.

[Chris]

You don't trade Perk to get "younger", you trade him to get more talented (and cost controlled).  

The idea of trading Perk is to try to get a player with the potential to be a star.  Perk is what he is.  He is a very good role player, but will likely never be any more than that.  So if you can get a more well-rounded player who could be a star, then it makes sense.

And it doesn't hurt that he could end up being too expensive to resign next summer, so now would be the time to move him if they don't want him to just walk.

[nickagneta]

Trading Perk to get younger makes no sense. Trading Perk to get better does.

Perk will be in the last year of his contract next year. It was probably going to be his last in Boston anyway as he is going to price himself out of value here in Boston. At $4 million per year he's a very valuable commodity for an aging core. Once that core starts to get too old or isn't here any longer and Perk starts looking at the team success as part of his value and starts demanding Rondo money, he's trade bait.

And believe me that time is almost upon us and Danyy Ainge knows that. Trading Perk and the 19th pick to get better in 2-3 years is smart. If the C's could get Cousins(who I think is the player the C's desire), that's a smart deal.

[Donoghus]

Trading Perk to get younger makes no sense. Trading Perk to get better does.

Perk will be in the last year of his contract next year. It was probably going to be his last in Boston anyway as he is going to price himself out of value here in Boston. At $4 million per year he's a very valuable commodity for an aging core. Once that core starts to get too old or isn't here any longer and Perk starts looking at the team success as part of his value and starts demanding Rondo money, he's trade bait.

And believe me that time is almost upon us and Danyy Ainge knows that. Trading Perk and the 19th pick to get better in 2-3 years is smart. If the C's could get Cousins(who I think is the player the C's desire), that's a smart deal.

Physically, Cousins is certainly gifted.

I'm just really concerned about that kid's mental makeup. 

[Chris]

And believe me that time is almost upon us and Danyy Ainge knows that. Trading Perk and the 19th pick to get better in 2-3 years is smart. If the C's could get Cousins(who I think is the player the C's desire), that's a smart deal.

As much as Cousins scares me, I agree that he is most likely the target, and I agree that it would be a smart gamble if they can pull it off.  

Ironically, the guy that Cousins reminds me of personality-wise is Perk.  I am not sure whether Cousins has the same work ethic (and I don't think we will know that until he gets into an NBA workout room), but he plays with the same edge that Perk does, and often has similar issues with controlling his emotions.

[Mr October]

Perk is an elite role player at best.  Ideally you want your young core to be made up of players who are stars or who have star potential.

So from a rebuilding standpoint, it makes sense to trade Perk to try to get potential stars.

Yup. As much as I like Perk, Rondo is the only future core player on this team.

Somehow I hope Perk can be retained, but if the right deal can be had, you have to make that move.

[FallGuy]

I feel like if Perk wasn't hurt, the deal would already be done.

That play in game six was a disaster for a number of reasons.

[Jon]

I agree that Perk is from a talent standpoint expendable, but given the fact that Dwight Howard is 24 and the fact that the road to the Finals is likely going to run through Orlando for the next 6-8 years, I like the idea of holding onto Perk.  

Does that mean I don't deal him to make a blockbuster go down?  No.  However, I wouldn't trade him for a perceived minor upgrade.  

[wiley]

I feel like if Perk wasn't hurt, the deal would already be done.

That play in game six was a disaster for a number of reasons.

Yup.  I can't help feel for Danny as well as the Celtics'players.  Perk would be a lot shinier with no injury, a second championship and a nice game 7 performance....

[2short]

I agree that Perk is from a talent standpoint expendable, but given the fact that Dwight Howard is 24 and the fact that the road to the Finals is likely going to run through Orlando for the next 6-8 years, I like the idea of holding onto Perk.  

Does that mean I don't deal him to make a blockbuster go down?  No.  However, I wouldn't trade him for a perceived minor upgrade.  

Agree on your point, perk is about the only guy who does a good job on howard on one on which is the key to beating Orlando
however if we were able to trade perk, #19, davis and sheeds expiring for brook lopez   in a heartbeat

I can actually, seriously see the C's going for the more fleet footed center to go all out fastbreak.  Play the great d, BOX OUT get the rebounds, get it to rondo and run the other teams into the ground.  see celtics, jojo, hondo & cowens

[the_Bird]

Trading Perk in lieu of giving him a $6M - $8M/year extension also allows them to do a couple other things.  If they need to go out to a third year to re-sign Ray Allen, they could do that and still have some cap space left in 2012.  More realistically, they could give Pierce an extension so he can finish his career in Boston, AND probably have enough cap space to make a splash that same summer (depending in part on things like whether they spend the MLE this summer, and for how long).

Trading Perk might allow Pierce to retire a Celtic, keep Rondo, AND to pursue someone very interesting (*cough cough DURANT*) in 2012.  

[Jon]

I agree that Perk is from a talent standpoint expendable, but given the fact that Dwight Howard is 24 and the fact that the road to the Finals is likely going to run through Orlando for the next 6-8 years, I like the idea of holding onto Perk.  

Does that mean I don't deal him to make a blockbuster go down?  No.  However, I wouldn't trade him for a perceived minor upgrade.  

Agree on your point, perk is about the only guy who does a good job on howard on one on which is the key to beating Orlando
however if we were able to trade perk, #19, davis and sheeds expiring for brook lopez   in a heartbeat

I can actually, seriously see the C's going for the more fleet footed center to go all out fastbreak.  Play the great d, BOX OUT get the rebounds, get it to rondo and run the other teams into the ground.  see celtics, jojo, hondo & cowens

It all depends though.  Is the "trade" we make with Perk for next year and one last run at a title or for the future?  If it's to upgrade for next year, I can somewhat relate to your last comment about a fleet-footed center.  However, if this is for the future, why can't the fleet-footed center be KG's eventual replacement with Perk playing next to him? 

Again, I'm not totally adverse to trading Perk, but I think the deal would have to be pretty special.