Per Sherrod Twitter...Sheed having second thoughts about retiring?

[anthony83]

If you had to bet now:
Do you think that Sheed back with the Celtics?

[BballTim]

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  Bringing Larry freakin' Bird into this equation???  I about spewed my drink on my computer screen.

And if you trade Rondo, who replaces him?  You want to roll with Nate?  Bradley?

Perk will NOT be missed this upcoming season, and he's not worth the money he will most likely demand...  Larry Bird, with one arm & leg cut off minus a testicle, is still better than Perk any day of the week... 

  Just pointing out how silly it is to say that Perk isn't going to improve much is a reason to trade him when he's already the starting center on a team that's been to the finals twice with him in the lineup. He might not be great on a fantasy team but he's a big part of why we've had postseason success. And Perk probably won't be missed during the regular season. But it should be painfully obvious to anyone who saw the Cavs series last year that we'll be in big trouble if we try and play the Heat with Shaq playing big minutes in the middle.

[mainevent]

If you had to bet now:
Do you think that Sheed back with the Celtics?

YES. I personally think he "retired" because of the grind of the regular season. Plus, he was really hurting towards the end. He gave it his all in the finals and I suppose he just didn't want to go thru the grind of the 82 games all over again. If he can rest throughout the season, I think he'd be all for it and looking at the bigs we've acquired he knows he will be able to get some time off.

[nickagneta]

I love how people constantly harp on the fact that Baby gets his shot blocked a lot and because of that want Sheed or doesn't but what's the difference between getting your shot blocked a lot and missing shots?

True Shooting percentage for Rasheed Wallace: 50.4%
True Shooting percentage for Glen Davis: 50%

Per 36 minutes Baby had 5 times more offensive rebounds than Rasheed and 1.3 more rebounds Per 36. He also went to the line over twice the amount of times than Rasheed did Per 36 and scored only 1.3 points Per 36 less than Rasheed  even though Rasheed took 2 more shots Per 36 than did Baby. I think it could also be argued that Baby picked up less technical fouls and drew more charges than did Rasheed and played with much more sense of energy and urgency than Rasheed did.

So if Baby got his shot blocked a lot, so freaking what!!!! He was offensively just as effective all around as Rasheed was and maybe more since he could be relied upon to getan offensive rebound and Rasheed could not.

[celticsclay]

I love how people constantly harp on the fact that Baby gets his shot blocked a lot and because of that want Sheed or doesn't but what's the difference between getting your shot blocked a lot and missing shots?

True Shooting percentage for Rasheed Wallace: 50.4%
True Shooting percentage for Glen Davis: 50%

Per 36 minutes Baby had 5 times more offensive rebounds than Rasheed and 1.3 more rebounds Per 36. He also went to the line over twice the amount of times than Rasheed did Per 36 and scored only 1.3 points Per 36 less than Rasheed  even though Rasheed took 2 more shots Per 36 than did Baby. I think it could also be argued that Baby picked up less technical fouls and drew more charges than did Rasheed and played with much more sense of energy and urgency than Rasheed did.

So if Baby got his shot blocked a lot, so freaking what!!!! He was offensively just as effective all around as Rasheed was and maybe more since he could be relied upon to getan offensive rebound and Rasheed could not.

I don't know if this is true or not, but it wouldn't surprise me if blocked shots are easier to turn in to fast break points then regular misses. You could also make an argument that a blocked shot is more demoralizing for a team. I know if I was playing basketball I would rather see a guy miss a shot on my team then get stuffed. If it kept happening over and over it could be really annoying. Not even bringing Wallace in as a comparison cause he obviously took some bad shots, but I'm just saying why the blocked shots might be viewed as bad by some.

[celticsclay]

Trade Perk once his rehab appears to be solid.

Sorry, but I didn't like his "no comment" when Shaq was signed.  Any player should be happy to have help. and yet I think Perk seems threatened by it.  I don't like him at all and I hope Danny sends this scowl-faced-technical foul-waiting-to-happen idiot somewhere else.

I think Perk as well as a draft pick could garner a nice return and I'm all for running with our bigs "by committee" because we'll have them signed on for the next couple years.

Honestly, I see Perk as the odd-man out, and that doesn't bother me in the least...

  If Perk starts looking healthy, trading him because of his scowl, techs or "no comment" to the Shaq signing is cutting off your nose to spite your face. In the short term, you're less likely to get by Miami or Orlando without his defense. In the long term, you're going to have to find a new center and a new pf instead of just a new pf, plus backups.

well, then putting those things aside, i'd trade him because he's maxed out his abilities and he's not going to get any better.  Shaq will be here for another year...Jermaine will be here for 2 more years.  If Sheed decides to not retire he also has another year on his original deal.  I'd go by those guys as a "committee" rather than perk who will DEMAND minutes because of his being younger, NOT better.

Put me in the minority who believes he might actually be the most tradeable asset on this team because whoever gets him will actually believe in the fool's gold type of game Perk provides. 

But I'd love to see Perk and Greg Kite play one-on-one - it would be a toss up, and that doesn't say much for Perk.

  Would you have traded Bird in 85 because he'd maxed out his abilities and wasn't going to get any better? That's silly, Perk right now is good enough to play a large (albeit complementary) role on a title contending team. And he probably wouldn't DEMAND minutes because of his being younger, but his play would demand it. You're kidding yourself if you don't think he's much better than Shaq, or that we're as likely to win a title if Perk isn't healthy.

  And he's not our most tradeable asset, Rondo is. But Perk would be very easy to trade if healthy. I'm pretty sure that whoever traded for Perk would know what he was getting. Not fools gold, but someone that's much more valuable than the 38 year old center that nobody wanted for more than the min and many teams didn't even want *for* the min.

the way I see it, it's not wether Perk is better than Shaq or Jermaine, it's wether you think he's worth giving a large contract to after this year as a building block for the future. He will not help us this year, his injury was too severe, so for the short term run, he is not better than any of the other bigs. For the long term, I'm not sure if he's worth more than 8 million a year, at most, to us. Would you lock up 8-10 million a year of cap space for him to be our future star big man? I don't know. I would try to clear cap room and go for Dwight Howard. Same for Davis, he's not worth a good sized long term deal either.

A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. I like old sayings. The reason I say that is cause with Perkins we know what we are getting (assuming he at least returns to form a little bit from this injury towards end of season). We know he is a hard worker, good defensive presence, gets along with rondo and pierce etc. I think we saw this past off season that completely clearing the deck to land free agents is a giant hit or miss. The hit was obviously the heat. The misses were the knicks, nets and Clippers. Two years from now if we have a massive amount of cap space but only rondo and a really old pierce under contract, do we know if we are that desirable a landing spot for players? Before our recent success we had a really hard time landing free agents. I think a team with a solid starting NBA center, Rondo and Pierce chasing some free agents is going to be more appealing then swinging for the fences and ending up with nothing.

Does anyone agree or disagree about we are better off having a few players then just rondo and pierce in two seasons? Should I start a new thread?

[Jon]

It is kind of funny if Shaq really does want Rasheed back.  Shaq is going to have a hard enough time getting the minutes he wants even without Rasheed here.  If Rasheed returns and Perk makes it back, it's possible Shaq isn't even in the rotation.

If I was Shaq, I'd keep my mouth shut. 

Still, if he comes back, we could look into trading Baby.  Though I don't love the idea, he's really our only trade asset to land a lengthy 3. 

[Drucci]

I would love to see Sheed come back. It would mean Baby would have to be traded but I would be OK with it if it landed us a backup wing.

A frontcourt composed of KG/Sheed/J.O/Shaq/Perk would be awesome, and the intimidation factor as its best!

[guava_wrench]

It is kind of funny if Shaq really does want Rasheed back.  Shaq is going to have a hard enough time getting the minutes he wants even without Rasheed here.  If Rasheed returns and Perk makes it back, it's possible Shaq isn't even in the rotation.

If I was Shaq, I'd keep my mouth shut. 

Still, if he comes back, we could look into trading Baby.  Though I don't love the idea, he's really our only trade asset to land a lengthy 3. 

Shaq might have come to the conclusion that this is the season for him to just have fun with his vet buddies.

[Jon]

It is kind of funny if Shaq really does want Rasheed back.  Shaq is going to have a hard enough time getting the minutes he wants even without Rasheed here.  If Rasheed returns and Perk makes it back, it's possible Shaq isn't even in the rotation.

If I was Shaq, I'd keep my mouth shut. 

Still, if he comes back, we could look into trading Baby.  Though I don't love the idea, he's really our only trade asset to land a lengthy 3. 

Shaq might have come to the conclusion that this is the season for him to just have fun with his vet buddies.

Maybe, but I doubt it. 

[clover]

It's good news that the O'Neal bros want Sheed back, 'cause it means they're not going to be demanding on minutes.  And I'm not counting on Perk being up to speed this year at all. 

Now, with all those old guys, someone else is likely to be out of commission too--so a stockpiling approach isn't bad at all.

[Roy Hobbs]

I love how people constantly harp on the fact that Baby gets his shot blocked a lot and because of that want Sheed or doesn't but what's the difference between getting your shot blocked a lot and missing shots?

True Shooting percentage for Rasheed Wallace: 50.4%
True Shooting percentage for Glen Davis: 50%

Per 36 minutes Baby had 5 times more offensive rebounds than Rasheed and 1.3 more rebounds Per 36. He also went to the line over twice the amount of times than Rasheed did Per 36 and scored only 1.3 points Per 36 less than Rasheed  even though Rasheed took 2 more shots Per 36 than did Baby. I think it could also be argued that Baby picked up less technical fouls and drew more charges than did Rasheed and played with much more sense of energy and urgency than Rasheed did.

So if Baby got his shot blocked a lot, so freaking what!!!! He was offensively just as effective all around as Rasheed was and maybe more since he could be relied upon to getan offensive rebound and Rasheed could not.

I don't know if this is true or not, but it wouldn't surprise me if blocked shots are easier to turn in to fast break points then regular misses. You could also make an argument that a blocked shot is more demoralizing for a team. I know if I was playing basketball I would rather see a guy miss a shot on my team then get stuffed. If it kept happening over and over it could be really annoying. Not even bringing Wallace in as a comparison cause he obviously took some bad shots, but I'm just saying why the blocked shots might be viewed as bad by some.

I don't know if blocked shots are more likely to lead to fast breaks, especially in the case of BBD.  He rebounds a lot of his own blocked shots, and ultimately converts a lot of them. 

I would assume that Rasheed's ill-advised bricks from the perimeter would lead to more fast breaks, since they lead to long rebounds, but I've never seen a statistical analysis done on it.

[celticsclay]

I love how people constantly harp on the fact that Baby gets his shot blocked a lot and because of that want Sheed or doesn't but what's the difference between getting your shot blocked a lot and missing shots?

True Shooting percentage for Rasheed Wallace: 50.4%
True Shooting percentage for Glen Davis: 50%

Per 36 minutes Baby had 5 times more offensive rebounds than Rasheed and 1.3 more rebounds Per 36. He also went to the line over twice the amount of times than Rasheed did Per 36 and scored only 1.3 points Per 36 less than Rasheed  even though Rasheed took 2 more shots Per 36 than did Baby. I think it could also be argued that Baby picked up less technical fouls and drew more charges than did Rasheed and played with much more sense of energy and urgency than Rasheed did.

So if Baby got his shot blocked a lot, so freaking what!!!! He was offensively just as effective all around as Rasheed was and maybe more since he could be relied upon to getan offensive rebound and Rasheed could not.

I don't know if this is true or not, but it wouldn't surprise me if blocked shots are easier to turn in to fast break points then regular misses. You could also make an argument that a blocked shot is more demoralizing for a team. I know if I was playing basketball I would rather see a guy miss a shot on my team then get stuffed. If it kept happening over and over it could be really annoying. Not even bringing Wallace in as a comparison cause he obviously took some bad shots, but I'm just saying why the blocked shots might be viewed as bad by some.

I don't know if blocked shots are more likely to lead to fast breaks, especially in the case of BBD.  He rebounds a lot of his own blocked shots, and ultimately converts a lot of them. 

I would assume that Rasheed's ill-advised bricks from the perimeter would lead to more fast breaks, since they lead to long rebounds, but I've never seen a statistical analysis done on it.

I'm sure in this advanced statistics age someone has figured it out, come on out geeks and give us the facts!

[Snakehead]

Sheed returning wouldn't be bad, he's a good player, but I would much rather have a good swingman.  Adding Sheed would be good for depth in the frontcourt but we wouldn't have enough playing time to go around.

A good swing would make more of an impact on this team at 2 and 3.

[Who]

Sheed would make a very good third string center.

I would rather have him as a trade asset rather than as a player but ... so long the C's ownership are content with the payroll (don't need to jettison salary to make room for Sheed's pay) ... then I'd rather have him as a player (third string center) than retired.

I wouldn't really consider this a playing time issue either. If Sheed returns he knows full well what he is signing up for and that is to be a reserve behind Perkins, Jermaine and Shaquille at center + behind Garnett, Jermaine, Davis at power forward.