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

[FallGuy]

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.  

Durant's going to resign with OKC. As early as next month.

[BballTim]

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.

  I think his knee injury might hamper his ability to get (moderately) big bucks, just like his shoulder/foot injuries did last time.

[mahonedog88]

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.  

That's a good point about the Magic and Howard.  Perk truly is the BEST center in the league at playing him one on one and the Celtics are the BEST team at coming up with good team defenses against Howard and the whole Magic team.

However, if we know that it's only going downhill from here on out for awhile, then if looking towards the future is what matters most and we can get a more offensively gifted center to go along with Rondo, then I agree, we do it.

Cause whats the point of arguing that we keep Perk to play the Magic if we can't even make it far enough in the playoffs to play the Magic anyway?

[j804]

and who is this potential star well be getting for Perk?

if we want to contend next year its a dumb move to trade Perk, im sure hell be ready to go midway through the season he didnt tear his acl. without Perk i doubt we even get out of the first round i dont get it...

[FallGuy]

and who is this potential star well be getting for Perk?

if we want to contend next year its a dumb move to trade Perk, im sure hell be ready to go midway through the season he didnt tear his acl. without Perk i doubt we even get out of the first round i dont get it...

I think it's unclear whether there's any real intention to contend next year. We may see a protracted (from now till the next trading deadline) breakup of the current squad.

[PosImpos]

and who is this potential star well be getting for Perk?

if we want to contend next year its a dumb move to trade Perk, im sure hell be ready to go midway through the season he didnt tear his acl. without Perk i doubt we even get out of the first round i dont get it...

I think it's unclear whether there's any real intention to contend next year. We may see a protracted (from now till the next trading deadline) breakup of the current squad.

Yeah.  This season we had a squad that totally overachieved and fought tremendously and still came up just a bit short of the title.  I think the only way to contend would be to somehow add more to what we had this year.  Unfortunately, with Sheed retiring and the Big 3 getting even older, it's hard to imagine how DA could actually put together a team that's better than the one we had this season.

Therefore, the thought process may be to begin the rebuilding phase while still looking for opportunities to improve quickly.

[FallGuy]

and who is this potential star well be getting for Perk?

if we want to contend next year its a dumb move to trade Perk, im sure hell be ready to go midway through the season he didnt tear his acl. without Perk i doubt we even get out of the first round i dont get it...

I think it's unclear whether there's any real intention to contend next year. We may see a protracted (from now till the next trading deadline) breakup of the current squad.

Yeah.  This season we had a squad that totally overachieved and fought tremendously and still came up just a bit short of the title.  I think the only way to contend would be to somehow add more to what we had this year.  Unfortunately, with Sheed retiring and the Big 3 getting even older, it's hard to imagine how DA could actually put together a team that's better than the one we had this season.

Therefore, the thought process may be to begin the rebuilding phase while still looking for opportunities to improve quickly.

Just wrote exactly the same thing in another thread.

Which is why I continue to wonder if we actually have seen the last of Paul Pierce.

[jco3423]

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. 

Cousins is gonna be the best player in the draft. He could def avg 15 and 10 his rookie year. Perk is good, but just wont have the career cousins will. Plus Cousins played with Wall at kentucky, who has a similar game to Rondo, so thats a plus. As for his maturity....well we have KG.

[ajgoodman]

First, I don't want to trade Perk. Period.

But I guess whether I would be looking to deal him for some explosive legs would depend on Danny Ainge.  Are we retooling, or rebuilding?

If we're seriously going for another title with the same core, we need Perk to anchor the defense against the Dwight Howards of the league.  KG just can't do it anymore.

But if next season is going to truly be a year without serious contention, maybe trading Perk for a young big man that could really benefit by playing with Kevin Garnett wouldn't be the most terrible thing.

But in my opinion, I would rather be coaxing some young legs that are going to be our front line WITH Perk in the future.

I still hold on to little hopes that Perk can become a solid offensive player... He showed a lot of promise in the first half of the season, but seemed to regress inexplicably.

[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. 

Cousins is gonna be the best player in the draft. He could def avg 15 and 10 his rookie year. Perk is good, but just wont have the career cousins will. Plus Cousins played with Wall at kentucky, who has a similar game to Rondo, so thats a plus. As for his maturity....well we have KG.

I have no doubt about the kid's physical talents.  He can certainly excel at the NBA level.

I just have doubts on his character.  Handing that kid millions of dollars certainly won't help things.   Coming to a veteran-ladden squad like the Celtics could only prove beneficial but I have doubts. 

I disagree about him being the best player in the draft.  That distinction falls to John Wall.  Cousins may put up better numbers as a rookie but, in the long run, Wall is going to be the better player.  I also think Turner could get some consideration there.

[Beat LA]

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.

Exactly, which is why he, along with Glen Davis, should have been traded last offseason when their respective values were never higher.  Look, I like Big Baby and respect Perk for the hard work that he does, but you have to decide whether or not these guys are going to be future stars, or above-average role players/bench guys on a championship squad.

Last year, Detroit was interested in Big Baby, and you would have to think that Dumars would have liked to get his hands on Perk, for both his style of play and his inexpensive contract.  I mean, potentially, we could have completed some kind of sign and trade with the Pistons to get Sheed for Perk and Tony if we could have(another expiring contract), and if it's possible (which I don't think it is) trade Big Baby for two of Detroit's second rounders last year (preferably the two highest of their three) and we could have selected Dejuan Blair, who easily could have replaced Leon and Baby, and Jonas Jerebko, in addition to Wes Matthews with our 58th pick.  All that would have been left to do is sign Ben Wallace once the buyout was completed with Phoenix.  We still would have had the MLE to use, as well as the bi-annual exception, which would have allowed us to resign Marbury (I really think that a full season w/training camp would have been great for both Starbury and our team), go out and get Joe Smith, Jerry Stackhouse, and Tim Thomas (another big guy who could have helped our spacing).  Sighhhhh.

[LarBrd33]

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.

Exactly, which is why he, along with Glen Davis, should have been traded last offseason when their respective values were never higher. 
 

We tried to.  There were rumors about us trying hard to trade Perk for a high lotto pick.  Nobody bit.  And nobody wanted fat Glen Davis.  We only signed him so he didn't leave for nothing and so we could take a chance on being able to trade him down the road.

[BballTim]

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.

Exactly, which is why he, along with Glen Davis, should have been traded last offseason when their respective values were never higher.  Look, I like Big Baby and respect Perk for the hard work that he does, but you have to decide whether or not these guys are going to be future stars, or above-average role players/bench guys on a championship squad.

Last year, Detroit was interested in Big Baby, and you would have to think that Dumars would have liked to get his hands on Perk, for both his style of play and his inexpensive contract.  I mean, potentially, we could have completed some kind of sign and trade with the Pistons to get Sheed for Perk and Tony if we could have(another expiring contract), and if it's possible (which I don't think it is) trade Big Baby for two of Detroit's second rounders last year (preferably the two highest of their three) and we could have selected Dejuan Blair, who easily could have replaced Leon and Baby, and Jonas Jerebko, in addition to Wes Matthews with our 58th pick.  All that would have been left to do is sign Ben Wallace once the buyout was completed with Phoenix.  We still would have had the MLE to use, as well as the bi-annual exception, which would have allowed us to resign Marbury (I really think that a full season w/training camp would have been great Starbury and our team), go out and get Joe Smith, Jerry Stackhouse, and Tim Thomas (another big guy who could have helped our spacing).  Sighhhhh.

  Unfortunately Danny didn't have a futurescope, which would have enabled him to trade for 2nd round draft picks and know which ones were going to be the best of the lot.

[Beat LA]

We tried to.  There were rumors about us trying hard to trade Perk for a high lotto pick.  Nobody bit.  And nobody wanted fat Glen Davis.  We only signed him so he didn't leave for nothing and so we could take a chance on being able to trade him down the road.

I'm not saying trade Perk for a lotto pick in last year's draft.  I'm saying maybe we could have traded him for Detroit's number 1 this year or at least their second round picks from last year.

Unfortunately Danny didn't have a futurescope, which would have enabled him to trade for 2nd round draft picks and know which ones were going to be the best of the lot.

I know, I know, hindsight is 20/20.  But I was wondering about Smith and Stackhouse at the time, though.  Maybe Danny needs to consult a psychic 

[FallGuy]

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.

Exactly, which is why he, along with Glen Davis, should have been traded last offseason when their respective values were never higher.  Look, I like Big Baby and respect Perk for the hard work that he does, but you have to decide whether or not these guys are going to be future stars, or above-average role players/bench guys on a championship squad.

Last year, Detroit was interested in Big Baby, and you would have to think that Dumars would have liked to get his hands on Perk, for both his style of play and his inexpensive contract.  I mean, potentially, we could have completed some kind of sign and trade with the Pistons to get Sheed for Perk and Tony if we could have(another expiring contract), and if it's possible (which I don't think it is) trade Big Baby for two of Detroit's second rounders last year (preferably the two highest of their three) and we could have selected Dejuan Blair, who easily could have replaced Leon and Baby, and Jonas Jerebko, in addition to Wes Matthews with our 58th pick.  All that would have been left to do is sign Ben Wallace once the buyout was completed with Phoenix.  We still would have had the MLE to use, as well as the bi-annual exception, which would have allowed us to resign Marbury (I really think that a full season w/training camp would have been great Starbury and our team), go out and get Joe Smith, Jerry Stackhouse, and Tim Thomas (another big guy who could have helped our spacing).  Sighhhhh.

  Unfortunately Danny didn't have a futurescope, which would have enabled him to trade for 2nd round draft picks and know which ones were going to be the best of the lot.

Totally agree. The second round is a pretty much a crapshoot. It's not reasonable to attack a GM for failing to draft one of the one or two guys who actually make it.