With Perk's injury would you trade Sheed and Perk for Jamison

[Moranis]

Since Perk is injured and there is no guarantee he will come back and be any sort of effective this season, and assuming Sheed is actually going to retire, would you trade Sheed and Perk for Jamison?  Jamison only has two years left so he doesn't change the 2012 cap picture at all and though he is older, is still a fairly effective player.  He is also a good compliment to both KG and JO offensively so it would actually improve the offense.  Obviously interior defense and rebounding is hurt with this trade, but you just don't know what Perk will be like come playoff time anyway.  

I also have no idea if Cleveland would do this trade since I don't really know what direction they are trying to go into, but this certainly cuts out a bunch of salary for them and lets them go into rebuilding faster.  They also might like Perk long term at center, or could just let him walk at the end of the year.


Also, if we included Davis, we could probably get back Parker or Moon, which would help solve the backup wing problem (though hurts the interior a bit more then I would like).

[Bankshot]

With the injury history of JO and KG, we need another big.  Trading away Sheed, Perk and Baby would not help in that department, as you're not getting a big in return.

[Fafnir]

In this scenario we'd have to move KG to C. We've already seen what Jamison is defensively, and it wasn't pretty. I'm confident that he'd be a productive player if the C's just used him correctly but I don't think its a good idea.

Giving up BBD too? Gah that'd leave us criminally thin at the 5 spot.

[Jon]

Assuming that salaries matched up (though they don't), I wouldn't trade just Sheed's contract for Jamison.  Adding Perk and/or Davis make it horrible.  

Jamison is an aging 3/4 hybrid who is too slow to guard 3s and too small to play center.  Thus, he really doesn't fill any of our needs.  

[wdleehi]

While I find it interesting, I wouldn't make this trade.  It makes the Celtics to small when facing teams like Orlando and LA. 




And the Celtics have one real path to win with this team.  That's defense.  They need to play defense like they did in 08 (much like last years defense but with stronger rebounding)  This move, while strengthening the offense, would be a serious blow to the defense. 

[CelticsWhat35]

Absolutely not.  We saw how Jamison disappeared in the playoffs last year.  And to be honest, if Perk isn't at least close to 100% come playoff time, I don't think the Celtics have much of a chance of competing for a title.

[Moranis]

With the injury history of JO and KG, we need another big.  Trading away Sheed, Perk and Baby would not help in that department, as you're not getting a big in return.

My initial idea didn't include Davis, I just sort of threw that out there, but ultimately I would want to keep Davis.  Who the C's would use as the 4th big.  

My thinking in the Sheed & Perk for Jamison trade was essentially this.  C's start JO at center, and KG at PF.  Jamison comes in for JO and KG slides to center.  JO then comes in for KG to play center next to Jamison.  Davis comes in for Jamison to play PF next to JO.  At some point you swap KG for JO with Davis.  And that is essentially the C's four man rotation

C - JO 30, KG 18
PF - KG 10, Jamison 25, Davis 13

Gives all those guys plenty of rest.  When foul trouble is a problem, just bump up Davis' minutes.

Given the C's won't even have Perkins until February and he probably won't be able to play more then 15-20 minutes effectively even by the playoffs (and who knows how effective he would be), I think adding a player of Jamison's ability would be much more useful for the team over the long haul.  He also then becomes a large expiring contract next summer/year that could be used to help jump start rebuilding.

[Moranis]

While I find it interesting, I wouldn't make this trade.  It makes the Celtics to small when facing teams like Orlando and LA. 




And the Celtics have one real path to win with this team.  That's defense.  They need to play defense like they did in 08 (much like last years defense but with stronger rebounding)  This move, while strengthening the offense, would be a serious blow to the defense. 

I don't disagree that it hurts the defense, but will Perk have the leg strength to muscle Howard or Bynum anyway.  Will he have the mobility to rebound and effectively guard the big centers anyway.  And frankly, it was the lack of offense that killed the Celtics verse the Lakers.  The C's had way too many stretches where they couldn't put it in the basket.  Given the uncertainty with Perk, why not increase the offensive output and efficiency by getting a player that will be healthy to start the season. 

[Fafnir]

I don't think we can win with Jamison instead of Perkins.

I think we'll have to gamble Perkins will be okay, and if he really can't come back effectively go from there. Honestly without an effective Perkins I don't know how the C's can win this year. If he's unable to come back my hope is that the C's can get another bargain contract for him as a silver lining....

[wdleehi]

While I find it interesting, I wouldn't make this trade.  It makes the Celtics to small when facing teams like Orlando and LA. 




And the Celtics have one real path to win with this team.  That's defense.  They need to play defense like they did in 08 (much like last years defense but with stronger rebounding)  This move, while strengthening the offense, would be a serious blow to the defense. 

I don't disagree that it hurts the defense, but will Perk have the leg strength to muscle Howard or Bynum anyway.  Will he have the mobility to rebound and effectively guard the big centers anyway.  And frankly, it was the lack of offense that killed the Celtics verse the Lakers.  The C's had way too many stretches where they couldn't put it in the basket.  Given the uncertainty with Perk, why not increase the offensive output and efficiency by getting a player that will be healthy to start the season. 

I look at this way, the Celtics only chance against those two teams is having Perk able to bang with those guys.  (LA big men have gone wild in the Finals when Perk is not available)  The chance he is not ready is the chance the Celtics have to take.

Trade him away for a smaller, offensive minded player (like Jamison who has more talent), the Celtics give away their only chance with this team to win (through defense)

I agree that trading Wallace for some bench defense is a good idea, but the offense does not have to be the level of Jamison.

Remember, the Celtics have already added a 12-14 point player (which will likely translate to 8-12 on this team)

[Chris]

No.  Jamison has lost more than a step, and he doesn't help this team sizewise.  While I am happy to move KG to Center, I don't think you can trade Perk and Sheed for an undersized PF on the downside of his career.  The only trades I would consider for Perk and Sheed right now, need to bring back a legit center, or a young, long, PF.

If we are combining Sheed and Perk in a deal, I would be looking at guys like Troy Murphy, Chris Kaman, Andris Biedrins, Anderson Varajao, and Tyson Chandler.  

[Who]

No chance.

Not giving up Perkins without getting a young building block back in return.

[Mike-Dub]

No way!

[cavman]

While I find it interesting, I wouldn't make this trade.  It makes the Celtics to small when facing teams like Orlando and LA. 




And the Celtics have one real path to win with this team.  That's defense.  They need to play defense like they did in 08 (much like last years defense but with stronger rebounding)  This move, while strengthening the offense, would be a serious blow to the defense. 

I don't disagree that it hurts the defense, but will Perk have the leg strength to muscle Howard or Bynum anyway.  Will he have the mobility to rebound and effectively guard the big centers anyway.  And frankly, it was the lack of offense that killed the Celtics verse the Lakers.  The C's had way too many stretches where they couldn't put it in the basket.  Given the uncertainty with Perk, why not increase the offensive output and efficiency by getting a player that will be healthy to start the season. 

We lost because we didn't rebound- way too many 2nd (& 3rd) chance points for LA, allowing them to stay in it.  Jameson doesn't help that one bit.  A gimpy Perk beats a AJ any day.

[Who]

Jamison + Shaq would cost this team more defensively than they add offensively.

It is a losing proposition.