Shaq is a vast upgrade over Perkins.

[housecall]

If Shaq is a better all around player, why is he available for the veteran's minimum? If he's a better all around player, why has Doc said the Celtics wanted him on the court in the Cleveland series?

TP...Ive always basically felt this way towards Perkins being better as a good situational C than being the starter every game.He plays D.Howard well but a lot of C's in the NBA today are more athletic and versatile that stretches the floor to the 3pt line where he isn't very good in defending.

Some possible responses:

1) Shaq wasn't going to the highest bidder this time.  His dollar value consequently measured by this contract.

2) Mike Brown was the 2nd worst NBA coach last year (behind Nellie), and didn't know how to use any of his players, including Shaq.  Though Doc said he wanted him on the opponent's lineup, he's also starting him right now (and ahead of JO in that brief window of his heath) ahead of BBD, who is very mobile for his...ahem...girth.

No question Shaq is not himself of 2000-2002 (the Finals MVP years), and now a coach has to figure out how and when to use his weapons while avoiding exposure by his weak areas.  During the Middle Years (between dominance and present role-player status), quite a few coaches (and Shaq himself) didn't figure out how to use him.  Doc, IMO, has mostly worked it out.  Shaq is actually getting better defensively right now, more than I've seen him in quite a few years.

I'll piggy-back on this, as I've seen the "Doc wanted Shaq on the court" argument used several times and I think it's a poor argument for several reasons.

1) (Last year) Shaq didn't fit next to LeBron. Offensively and defensively, Shaq was a round peg in a square hole for that team.  The Cavs defense needed an anchor, and with Shaq starting next to Jamison they had none.  And offensively, one of Shaq's best traits is his ability to either attract defensive attention (thus opening things up for teammates) or to score from point-blank range off the set-up.  This didn't fit what LeBron needed.  Shaq may have drawn attention from defenders of the Cavs' lesser players, but he wasn't freeing up space for LeBron.  And, in fact, LeBron wants to run and/or drive the lane, two things that Shaq was actually a hindrance for.

In short, Doc wanting Shaq on the court for CLEVELAND has very little to do with his value to the Celtics.

2) Shaq DOES fit here. Offensively, we play at a pace conducive to Shaq (unlike LeBron's ideal).  We have strong offensive options at the other 4 positions and an equal-opportunity offense with good shooters...thus, Shaq's ability to either draw defensive attention or take advantage of the mismatch IS a big positive to our offense (unlike Cleveland last year).  We also have excellent passers at most positions, allowing Shaq to score at the rim on easy set-ups instead of having to post up (a part of his game that has slid).  In other words, Shaq fits extremely well into our offense (and it shows vividly in the admittedly small sample size, as the Celtics score 119 points/100 possessions with Shaq and 106 points/100 possessions with him on the bench).

And just as important, Shaq also works reasonably well defensively on THIS team.  The biggest key with Shaq is that he is not very mobile as a defender...so you have to pair him with a defensive big that IS.  For Cleveland last year, the Shaq/Varejao pairing gave up about 100 points per 100 possessions together...essentially the same as what we gave up with the KG/Perk pairing.  It was only when Cleveland tried to match Shaq with Jamison or Hickson that their defense struggled (110 points/100 possessions).  In Boston, playing next to a healthy Kevin Garnett in the helping defensive scheme that we run, Shaq is fine as a defender.  In fact, with his size and willingness to be physical he has in some ways made our interior defense nastier with the no layup rule.  I like it.

3) Shaq is just better than Perk. I've been saying it for years, and 14 games into a season with no Perk at all I've seen nothing to dissuade me: Perk is a nice defensive role player, but he is NOT a defensive star.  He plays his part well, rotates hard, is a better help defender than Shaq.  All of that.  But he isn't out there making a huge defensive impact.  Yes, it's still relatively early.  But you can't just ignore that right now the Celtics as a team are giving up 100.8 points/100 possessions...a better mark than they posted either of the last 2 years with a fully healthy and playing well Perkins.  Their defense isn't struggling, and without a strong argument on that side of the ball Perk doesn't really have a leg to stand on IMO.

Conclusion: Long story short, Perk isn't really missed that much on defense.  But conversely, Shaq is making a big difference in the team offense.  I agree with the OP, this isn't particularly close.  I'll be happy when Perk comes back because he does bring some good things to the table and he's earned a place at the table for this team, but I'll be happy to have him back as depth and for situational purposes.  Barring injury, I'll be very disappointed if Shaq isn't out there with our main unit in the postseason.

[housecall]

If Shaq is a better all around player, why is he available for the veteran's minimum? If he's a better all around player, why has Doc said the Celtics wanted him on the court in the Cleveland series?

Some possible responses:

1) Shaq wasn't going to the highest bidder this time.  His dollar value consequently measured by this contract.

2) Mike Brown was the 2nd worst NBA coach last year (behind Nellie), and didn't know how to use any of his players, including Shaq.  Though Doc said he wanted him on the opponent's lineup, he's also starting him right now (and ahead of JO in that brief window of his heath) ahead of BBD, who is very mobile for his...ahem...girth.

No question Shaq is not himself of 2000-2002 (the Finals MVP years), and now a coach has to figure out how and when to use his weapons while avoiding exposure by his weak areas.  During the Middle Years (between dominance and present role-player status), quite a few coaches (and Shaq himself) didn't figure out how to use him.  Doc, IMO, has mostly worked it out.  Shaq is actually getting better defensively right now, more than I've seen him in quite a few years.

I'll piggy-back on this, as I've seen the "Doc wanted Shaq on the court" argument used several times and I think it's a poor argument for several reasons.

1) (Last year) Shaq didn't fit next to LeBron. Offensively and defensively, Shaq was a round peg in a square hole for that team.  The Cavs defense needed an anchor, and with Shaq starting next to Jamison they had none.  And offensively, one of Shaq's best traits is his ability to either attract defensive attention (thus opening things up for teammates) or to score from point-blank range off the set-up.  This didn't fit what LeBron needed.  Shaq may have drawn attention from defenders of the Cavs' lesser players, but he wasn't freeing up space for LeBron.  And, in fact, LeBron wants to run and/or drive the lane, two things that Shaq was actually a hindrance for.

In short, Doc wanting Shaq on the court for CLEVELAND has very little to do with his value to the Celtics.

2) Shaq DOES fit here. Offensively, we play at a pace conducive to Shaq (unlike LeBron's ideal).  We have strong offensive options at the other 4 positions and an equal-opportunity offense with good shooters...thus, Shaq's ability to either draw defensive attention or take advantage of the mismatch IS a big positive to our offense (unlike Cleveland last year).  We also have excellent passers at most positions, allowing Shaq to score at the rim on easy set-ups instead of having to post up (a part of his game that has slid).  In other words, Shaq fits extremely well into our offense (and it shows vividly in the admittedly small sample size, as the Celtics score 119 points/100 possessions with Shaq and 106 points/100 possessions with him on the bench).

And just as important, Shaq also works reasonably well defensively on THIS team.  The biggest key with Shaq is that he is not very mobile as a defender...so you have to pair him with a defensive big that IS.  For Cleveland last year, the Shaq/Varejao pairing gave up about 100 points per 100 possessions together...essentially the same as what we gave up with the KG/Perk pairing.  It was only when Cleveland tried to match Shaq with Jamison or Hickson that their defense struggled (110 points/100 possessions).  In Boston, playing next to a healthy Kevin Garnett in the helping defensive scheme that we run, Shaq is fine as a defender.  In fact, with his size and willingness to be physical he has in some ways made our interior defense nastier with the no layup rule.  I like it.

3) Shaq is just better than Perk. I've been saying it for years, and 14 games into a season with no Perk at all I've seen nothing to dissuade me: Perk is a nice defensive role player, but he is NOT a defensive star.  He plays his part well, rotates hard, is a better help defender than Shaq.  All of that.  But he isn't out there making a huge defensive impact.  Yes, it's still relatively early.  But you can't just ignore that right now the Celtics as a team are giving up 100.8 points/100 possessions...a better mark than they posted either of the last 2 years with a fully healthy and playing well Perkins.  Their defense isn't struggling, and without a strong argument on that side of the ball Perk doesn't really have a leg to stand on IMO.

Conclusion: Long story short, Perk isn't really missed that much on defense.  But conversely, Shaq is making a big difference in the team offense.  I agree with the OP, this isn't particularly close.  I'll be happy when Perk comes back because he does bring some good things to the table and he's earned a place at the table for this team, but I'll be happy to have him back as depth and for situational purposes.  Barring injury, I'll be very disappointed if Shaq isn't out there with our main unit in the postseason.

[wdleehi]

Two headed monster theory.




Start Perk because his defense is best served against the other teams most talented players.  Lean on them.  Hard fouls.  Good defense.



Perk goes out, Shaq comes in.  He continues to lean on them.  Hard fouls.  The best defense he can provide.  Except Shaq becomes a more deadly offensive weapon off the bench as he is defended by the other teams number two.  Best case scenario, he forces the number 1 C back into the game earlier then the coach wants.  Then both he and Perk can lean on him.  Wear out the legs in a 7 game series. 

[Fafnir]

Yes, it's still relatively early.  But you can't just ignore that right now the Celtics as a team are giving up 100.8 points/100 possessions...a better mark than they posted either of the last 2 years with a fully healthy and playing well Perkins.  Their defense isn't struggling, and without a strong argument on that side of the ball Perk doesn't really have a leg to stand on IMO.

I don't think that number is telling, because for large portions of both of those years we haven't had a healthy KG. That is certainly going to skew the numbers.

In 2008-2009 in particular our defensive efficiency dropped once KG was gone. KG went out Feb. 19, you can see the effect on our defense.

October           85.71341627
November   99.87801438
December   100.1017333
January           103.8574922
February   104.0817343
March           106.2900546
April           111.6771004

In 2009-2010 I don't recall exactly when KG started to get gimpy again. Based on his splits and memory I want to say it was during the west coast trip at the end of December:

October           90.42708887
November   102.3632006
December   101.9087903
January           105.6806637
February   105.0151544
March           105.1938334
April           114.9500265

I think those splits speak for themselves, whether or not KG is moving around well is the key to our defense. I don't think we can conclude that Shaq is just as effective as Perkins defensively, not when he's surrounded by such a strong unit for the majority of his minutes and a healthy KG.

Of course given the minutes both play their impact is also somewhat distorted, Perkins is able to be on the court for longer stretches.

[Birdbrain]

I'll wait until I actually see Perkins play a minute before making any proclamations.  Perkins ability to play help defense allows KG to roam without having to worry about the paint.  With shaq in there right now it's led to some easy baskets.  

I'll just be happy if they are both healthy come playoff time.  

I did read where Doc mentioned Perkins is the starter when he gets back.  He says that now but, if the C's are rolling when he comes back I doubt very much Perkins will get the starting role back.  The way Perkins deals with coming off the bench could be either good or bad for the C's.  Doc is probably aware of the fact that Perkins will take it as more of slight if he's coming off the bench and it's probably fueling his some of his comments as well.

[jdpapa3]

Fafnir: solid, solid points. I didn't know they had defensive efficiency broken down month by month??!! Where's that at?

[drza44]

Yes, it's still relatively early.  But you can't just ignore that right now the Celtics as a team are giving up 100.8 points/100 possessions...a better mark than they posted either of the last 2 years with a fully healthy and playing well Perkins.  Their defense isn't struggling, and without a strong argument on that side of the ball Perk doesn't really have a leg to stand on IMO.

I don't think that number is telling, because for large portions of both of those years we haven't had a healthy KG. That is certainly going to skew the numbers.

In 2008-2009 in particular our defensive efficiency dropped once KG was gone. KG went out Feb. 19, you can see the effect on our defense.

October           85.71341627
November   99.87801438
December   100.1017333
January           103.8574922
February   104.0817343
March           106.2900546
April           111.6771004

In 2009-2010 I don't recall exactly when KG started to get gimpy again. Based on his splits and memory I want to say it was during the west coast trip at the end of December:

October           90.42708887
November   102.3632006
December   101.9087903
January           105.6806637
February   105.0151544
March           105.1938334
April           114.9500265

I think those splits speak for themselves, whether or not KG is moving around well is the key to our defense. I don't think we can conclude that Shaq is just as effective as Perkins defensively, not when he's surrounded by such a strong unit for the majority of his minutes and a healthy KG.

Of course given the minutes both play their impact is also somewhat distorted, Perkins is able to be on the court for longer stretches.

1) First, I've been meaning to ask you for awhile now...where do you get your wonderful numbers?  You often have splits that I've wanted and/or had to try to calculate myself, so I'd appreciate if there's a site that has it available.

2) I think we're essentially making the same point, but drawing different conclusions.  My point wasn't that Shaq is as good on defense as Perk.  My point was that Perk was secondary to the defense, and that the main cog there is KG.  And that with a healthy KG, we can have an elite defense even without Perk.  As such, Perk's added defensive utility is essentially diminished returns when compared to the improvements on offense that Shaq provides without really hurting the defense. 

He doesn't have to be as good on defense as Perk for the team to be better served with him out there.  If Perkins was the difference between our defense being elite and it being average, then yeah, you deal with his offensive shortcomings and keep it moving.  But essentially (again, this is just with a 14-game sample size) Perk's absence doesn't really seem relevant to how our team defense does.  On the other hand, Shaq seems to be hugely relevant to how our team offense does.  When I put those two things side by side, I don't really see how this is much of a competition. 

[Roy H.]

Yes, it's still relatively early.  But you can't just ignore that right now the Celtics as a team are giving up 100.8 points/100 possessions...a better mark than they posted either of the last 2 years with a fully healthy and playing well Perkins.  Their defense isn't struggling, and without a strong argument on that side of the ball Perk doesn't really have a leg to stand on IMO.

I don't think that number is telling, because for large portions of both of those years we haven't had a healthy KG. That is certainly going to skew the numbers.

In 2008-2009 in particular our defensive efficiency dropped once KG was gone. KG went out Feb. 19, you can see the effect on our defense.

October           85.71341627
November   99.87801438
December   100.1017333
January           103.8574922
February   104.0817343
March           106.2900546
April           111.6771004

In 2009-2010 I don't recall exactly when KG started to get gimpy again. Based on his splits and memory I want to say it was during the west coast trip at the end of December:

October           90.42708887
November   102.3632006
December   101.9087903
January           105.6806637
February   105.0151544
March           105.1938334
April           114.9500265

I think those splits speak for themselves, whether or not KG is moving around well is the key to our defense. I don't think we can conclude that Shaq is just as effective as Perkins defensively, not when he's surrounded by such a strong unit for the majority of his minutes and a healthy KG.

Of course given the minutes both play their impact is also somewhat distorted, Perkins is able to be on the court for longer stretches.

Another factor, beyond just KG's health (and the health of the team as a whole last year) was the team's focus.  Beginning in early January or so, last year's team seemed to mail it in and underperform.  The numbers you cited seem to support that.

Just watching the games, Shaq seems to be caught out of position more than Perk, and he isn't as quick to recover.  That fits with the observation from just about everybody that Shaq's pick-and-roll and away from the basket defense has declined significantly from it's peak, to the point of being poor currently.

[Fafnir]

Fafnir: solid, solid points. I didn't know they had defensive efficiency broken down month by month??!! Where's that at?

They don't, I actually typed in the formula for defensive ratings into excel and then used the splits data from baskteball reference in csv format. I pasted those in excel and that gave me the month by month splits.

(I just bought Basketball on Paper by Dean Oliver on my kindle)

[Fafnir]

I will sit down and compose a list of all the basketball stats sites I use and PM it to you. The defensive rating splits I had to calculate on my own.

On the other hand, Shaq seems to be hugely relevant to how our team offense does.  When I put those two things side by side, I don't really see how this is much of a competition. 

Our team's offensive rating is about a point better than last year's so far. I'm curious how that will hold up over the season. So far Rondo taking the lead and controlling the offense more has been a good thing. We really need him healthy and in the line up.

[Spicoli]

If Shaq is a better all around player, why is he available for the veteran's minimum? If he's a better all around player, why has Doc said the Celtics wanted him on the court in the Cleveland series?

Some possible responses:

1) Shaq wasn't going to the highest bidder this time.  His dollar value consequently measured by this contract.

2) Mike Brown was the 2nd worst NBA coach last year (behind Nellie), and didn't know how to use any of his players, including Shaq.  Though Doc said he wanted him on the opponent's lineup, he's also starting him right now (and ahead of JO in that brief window of his heath) ahead of BBD, who is very mobile for his...ahem...girth.

No question Shaq is not himself of 2000-2002 (the Finals MVP years), and now a coach has to figure out how and when to use his weapons while avoiding exposure by his weak areas.  During the Middle Years (between dominance and present role-player status), quite a few coaches (and Shaq himself) didn't figure out how to use him.  Doc, IMO, has mostly worked it out.  Shaq is actually getting better defensively right now, more than I've seen him in quite a few years.

I'll piggy-back on this, as I've seen the "Doc wanted Shaq on the court" argument used several times and I think it's a poor argument for several reasons.

1) (Last year) Shaq didn't fit next to LeBron. Offensively and defensively, Shaq was a round peg in a square hole for that team.  The Cavs defense needed an anchor, and with Shaq starting next to Jamison they had none.  And offensively, one of Shaq's best traits is his ability to either attract defensive attention (thus opening things up for teammates) or to score from point-blank range off the set-up.  This didn't fit what LeBron needed.  Shaq may have drawn attention from defenders of the Cavs' lesser players, but he wasn't freeing up space for LeBron.  And, in fact, LeBron wants to run and/or drive the lane, two things that Shaq was actually a hindrance for.

In short, Doc wanting Shaq on the court for CLEVELAND has very little to do with his value to the Celtics.

2) Shaq DOES fit here. Offensively, we play at a pace conducive to Shaq (unlike LeBron's ideal).  We have strong offensive options at the other 4 positions and an equal-opportunity offense with good shooters...thus, Shaq's ability to either draw defensive attention or take advantage of the mismatch IS a big positive to our offense (unlike Cleveland last year).  We also have excellent passers at most positions, allowing Shaq to score at the rim on easy set-ups instead of having to post up (a part of his game that has slid).  In other words, Shaq fits extremely well into our offense (and it shows vividly in the admittedly small sample size, as the Celtics score 119 points/100 possessions with Shaq and 106 points/100 possessions with him on the bench).

And just as important, Shaq also works reasonably well defensively on THIS team.  The biggest key with Shaq is that he is not very mobile as a defender...so you have to pair him with a defensive big that IS.  For Cleveland last year, the Shaq/Varejao pairing gave up about 100 points per 100 possessions together...essentially the same as what we gave up with the KG/Perk pairing.  It was only when Cleveland tried to match Shaq with Jamison or Hickson that their defense struggled (110 points/100 possessions).  In Boston, playing next to a healthy Kevin Garnett in the helping defensive scheme that we run, Shaq is fine as a defender.  In fact, with his size and willingness to be physical he has in some ways made our interior defense nastier with the no layup rule.  I like it.

3) Shaq is just better than Perk. I've been saying it for years, and 14 games into a season with no Perk at all I've seen nothing to dissuade me: Perk is a nice defensive role player, but he is NOT a defensive star.  He plays his part well, rotates hard, is a better help defender than Shaq.  All of that.  But he isn't out there making a huge defensive impact.  Yes, it's still relatively early.  But you can't just ignore that right now the Celtics as a team are giving up 100.8 points/100 possessions...a better mark than they posted either of the last 2 years with a fully healthy and playing well Perkins.  Their defense isn't struggling, and without a strong argument on that side of the ball Perk doesn't really have a leg to stand on IMO.

Conclusion: Long story short, Perk isn't really missed that much on defense.  But conversely, Shaq is making a big difference in the team offense.  I agree with the OP, this isn't particularly close.  I'll be happy when Perk comes back because he does bring some good things to the table and he's earned a place at the table for this team, but I'll be happy to have him back as depth and for situational purposes.  Barring injury, I'll be very disappointed if Shaq isn't out there with our main unit in the postseason.

TP

[mgent]

I think Shaq should learn how to take charges.  Guys are always jumping right into his chest trying to get the foul (or the phantom flagrant).

[moiso]

I think Shaq should learn how to take charges.  Guys are always jumping right into his chest trying to get the foul (or the phantom flagrant).

He doesn't move his feet well enough to draw many charges- he'll end up fouling the other guy more often than not.  As for flopping when someone jumps into him, he has always been against flopping and I don't see him changing at his age.

[More Banners]

I think Shaq should learn how to take charges.  Guys are always jumping right into his chest trying to get the foul (or the phantom flagrant).

He doesn't move his feet well enough to draw many charges- he'll end up fouling the other guy more often than not.  As for flopping when someone jumps into him, he has always been against flopping and I don't see him changing at his age.

Shaq flopping would be the oddest thing to see on the court...7'2", 320lbs, falls over when bumped by a TJ Ford?

[Casperian]

2) I think we're essentially making the same point, but drawing different conclusions.  My point wasn't that Shaq is as good on defense as Perk.  My point was that Perk was secondary to the defense, and that the main cog there is KG.  And that with a healthy KG, we can have an elite defense even without Perk.  As such, Perk's added defensive utility is essentially diminished returns when compared to the improvements on offense that Shaq provides without really hurting the defense. 

So, if we take KG out of the picture, what other reasons do you see why the Celtics defense of the KG era is so much better than the D of those Timberwolves teams KG was on?
I´m not trying to play devil´s advocate, I`d just like to know your opinion.