Shaq is a vast upgrade over Perkins.

[drza44]

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.

Not to take this too far off topic, but to answer your question, I think the biggest difference is reasonable defensive support vs awful support.  The Celtics of the last few years have shown that they can be an average team defense when Garnett is out.  

But if you look at those Wolves teams, you'd often find combinations of several of the worst defenders in the league in the starting line-up at any one time.  Troy Hudson, Anthony Peeler, Wally Szczerbiak, Ricky Davis, Mark Blount, old Sam Cassell (not all at the same time, but several at a time over years)...just from watching the players, it was obvious that Garnett was expected to guard his man, help all of his teammates, and get the defensive rebound on every possession. Without him, those squads likely sport historically bad defenses.

Then, if you want to go nerd, the numbers also support this.  KG led the NBA in adjusted defensive +/- for several years in Minnesota, even when the actual team defense wasn't very good.  The one year they put even semi-credible defenders around him (old Erv Johnson, Trenton Hassell, Spree and Cassell) KG was able to make them a top-5 defense.  And then, of course, when he was surrounded by reasonable defenders in a reasonable defensive scheme in Boston, the result was historic.

Short answer: KG always has taken his team defenses up several notches from where they would be without him.  It's just a question of whether it's awful to average in Minnesota, or average to historic in Boston.

[Casperian]

Short answer: KG always has taken his team defenses up several notches from where they would be without him.  It's just a question of whether it's awful to average in Minnesota, or average to historic in Boston.

No question, KG is one of the all-time great defenders, in my opinion, who can improve any team, defensively.

It´s just, I think it´s all about order and discipline of all 5 players on the court. You can have 4 great defenders, if the fifth one is a liability, the opponent has a mismatch it can exploit. To rely on Shaq for a whole playoff run seems a bit risky to me. I think it would be a mistake to dismiss Perk´s importance to this team for that reason alone.

[GreenFaith1819]

I disagree with the title of the thread.

Even considering the statistics that I've seen throughout this thread, and the good debates -


Weren't we a Perk Short of bringing home Banner 18 - sans Shaq or JO? Just a few short months ago?

If Perk hadn't went down, would we have JO or Shaq right now?

Don't get me wrong - like everyone else, I see how well Shaq meshes with KG and the team. I love seeing Shaq (and JO) in Green. Shaq still has a lot left in limited minutes, and I cannot see how LA will beat us this time around - especially if we can get Perk back to at least 70-80%. He is better offensively than Perk, and he is not that bad defensively (with KG's help, as it's been mentioned throughout this thread).

But even with that, like I asked earlier: Would Shaq or JO be here if Perk hadn't went down?

[drza44]

I disagree with the title of the thread.

Even considering the statistics that I've seen throughout this thread, and the good debates -


Weren't we a Perk Short of bringing home Banner 18 - sans Shaq or JO? Just a few short months ago?

If Perk hadn't went down, would we have JO or Shaq right now?

Don't get me wrong - like everyone else, I see how well Shaq meshes with KG and the team. I love seeing Shaq (and JO) in Green. Shaq still has a lot left in limited minutes, and I cannot see how LA will beat us this time around - especially if we can get Perk back to at least 70-80%. He is better offensively than Perk, and he is not that bad defensively (with KG's help, as it's been mentioned throughout this thread).

But even with that, like I asked earlier: Would Shaq or JO be here if Perk hadn't went down?

I agree that Perk is an important part of the team.  I agree that we likely win last season if Perk didn't go down, especially with the "foul trouble" that our only 2 remaining 7 footers had in game 7.  And I agree that if Perk hadn't gone down then at least 1 of the O'Neals aren't here, maybe even both.

That said.

I don't know how that really relates to the question at hand.  We could have actually won the championship last year, but still have room to be a better team.  And I think that's what this comes down to.  I think that our main unit is stronger and more formidable with Shaq in there instead of Perk.  The net gain offensively is larger than the defensive loss, and on the whole the unit is stronger.

Now, that's not to say that Perk should be cut.  Or that he hasn't been an important part of the team, or that he won't perhaps have a larger role down the line.  But this year, for this team, I think they are stronger with Shaq starting than they would be with Perk.  I also think that having Perk, O'Neal and Baby (along with Semih now, I guess) is excellent big man depth, a second major strength in addition to our strong starting unit.  Perkins will still bring something to the table if he is able to get back to full health this year.  I just don't think putting him back into the starting line-up best serves the team.

[GreenFaith1819]

I disagree with the title of the thread.

Even considering the statistics that I've seen throughout this thread, and the good debates -


Weren't we a Perk Short of bringing home Banner 18 - sans Shaq or JO? Just a few short months ago?

If Perk hadn't went down, would we have JO or Shaq right now?

Don't get me wrong - like everyone else, I see how well Shaq meshes with KG and the team. I love seeing Shaq (and JO) in Green. Shaq still has a lot left in limited minutes, and I cannot see how LA will beat us this time around - especially if we can get Perk back to at least 70-80%. He is better offensively than Perk, and he is not that bad defensively (with KG's help, as it's been mentioned throughout this thread).

But even with that, like I asked earlier: Would Shaq or JO be here if Perk hadn't went down?

I agree that Perk is an important part of the team.  I agree that we likely win last season if Perk didn't go down, especially with the "foul trouble" that our only 2 remaining 7 footers had in game 7.  And I agree that if Perk hadn't gone down then at least 1 of the O'Neals aren't here, maybe even both.

That said.

I don't know how that really relates to the question at hand.  We could have actually won the championship last year, but still have room to be a better team.  And I think that's what this comes down to.  I think that our main unit is stronger and more formidable with Shaq in there instead of Perk.  The net gain offensively is larger than the defensive loss, and on the whole the unit is stronger.

Now, that's not to say that Perk should be cut.  Or that he hasn't been an important part of the team, or that he won't perhaps have a larger role down the line.  But this year, for this team, I think they are stronger with Shaq starting than they would be with Perk.  I also think that having Perk, O'Neal and Baby (along with Semih now, I guess) is excellent big man depth, a second major strength in addition to our strong starting unit.  Perkins will still bring something to the table if he is able to get back to full health this year.  I just don't think putting him back into the starting line-up best serves the team.

Well, that's all fine, but it still doesn't quantify for me that Shaq is a vast upgrade over Perk.

[Neurotic Guy]

Best of all worlds would be a single center who could start the game, finish the game, play about 36 minutes with consistency on both ends and with good health. None of our centers can do that.   But given that all can contribute, I'll be glad to have the chance to mix and match with all in relatively good health come May.

[Neurotic Guy]

While Doc Rivers' situation is nowhere near as dire as the one described in the excerpt below, I have thought about this speech from 'Bang the Drum Slowly' in reference to our center situation. The speech is delivered by the manager (played Vincent Gardenia) to his star holdout pitcher Author (played by Michael Moriarty) after Author tells the manager that he'll only sign a contract if they agree never to trade/release his roommate (referred to as the 'plum dumb' catcher).  Later in the film, it is revealed that Author made the demand because his roommate is dying.  The manager's speech is his brilliant and exasperated rationalization for agreeing to Author's demand.  Someone more talented than I could write a Doc Rivers' version for when he has all 4 centers (hopefully) at his disposal:



"I have a catcher that's old, and another that can't hit and another that's wild and crazy and another that's just plum dumb. I would give both my eyes for Sam Mott of Cincinatti, but they want Author, and I cannot give Author, or if I give you (Author), I must have Scudder off of Brooklyn, which the son of btches will not give me except for all my right-hand power.  I could spare my right-hand power if I could swing a deal with Pittsburgh, but Pittsburgh wants Author and I have already give you on paper to Cincinatti for Sam Mott.  So I must play my old catcher on days when he feels young, and my catcher that can't hit on the days the power is on, and my wild and crazy catcher on days he ever comes to his sense, which so far he's given me no sign of really having any.  I will ship him back down to QC and see if Mike Mulrooney can talk him off his motorcycle.  We must never have another motorcycle in camp! I been trying for days to get some sleep. When you really stop to think about, I'm libel to wind up using my catcher that is just plum dumb more and more."


No -- I don't consider any of the C's centers to be plum dumb, just all different.

[snowball]

Barring injury, I'll be very disappointed if Shaq isn't out there with our main unit in the postseason.

Condensing your excellent analysis to this statement, I agree.
I have been thinking this for the last few weeks.
Shaq has proven his abilities and perfect chemistry with the
first unit. THE FIRST UNIT. He needs Rondo. He needs Kevin.
He needs Ray. I don't want Shaq WASTED in the second unit.
Think about it. The second unit needs defensive strength more
than the first. If we can shut down opposing benches with Perk
and Delonte, that would be great. Perk is actually wasted on the
first unit. We get our rebs from Garnett and Rondo. First Unit
cohesion is most improved with Shaqtus. If you don't believe me,
believe Garnett. The Big Ticket and The Big Consultant on the same unit. THE BIG UNIT 5 HALL OF FAMERS (including Rondo). Let Perk rehab on the 2nd unit. And don't even think about shortchanging
Diesel's ability to kick it up a notch for the playoffs. Have you noticed he's in better shape than he's been in years. He loves the
game now and loves THE FIRST UNIT.
Doc, Paul, Kevin, Ray, Rondo.. CAN MAKE IT HAPPEN.
All that needs to be overcome is the possible promises made to
Perk ( or assumptions ) from Danny and Doc. Let the players talk
they are the ones on the court, and KG IS TALKING.

[GreenEnvy]

Offensively, the Celtics are significantly better with Shaq.

Defensively, the Celtics are markedly better with Perkins.

Overall, it's really hard to say.

We already know what they are with Rondo-Ray-P2-KG-Perk. They are Champs.

My guess is we will see Shaq early (maybe even STARTING the first six minutes of the game?) and Perk late (last 4 minutes) come April-May-June. JO (if healthy) moves over to PF and Baby loses minutes (if he is still on the team or again, depending on JO's effectiveness).

[jdub1660]

Notice how happy KG is though? B/c Shaq is a breath of fresh air when it comes to passing out of the double team and he finishes instead of butterfingering the ball out of bounds.

And is it just me or does Shaq catch and finish way more alleyoops?

I would think that Perk would be more athletic at his age, but you just don't see many lobs from Rondo to Perk.
The part I want to argue/debate is it just Perk that's not smart enough to be in the right spot for lobs, or be ready to catch them, or Rondo's lack of faith that Perk will finish?

[Fafnir]

Notice how happy KG is though? B/c Shaq is a breath of fresh air when it comes to passing out of the double team and he finishes instead of butterfingering the ball out of bounds.

And is it just me or does Shaq catch and finish way more alleyoops?

I would think that Perk would be more athletic at his age, but you just don't see many lobs from Rondo to Perk.
The part I want to argue/debate is it just Perk that's not smart enough to be in the right spot for lobs, or be ready to catch them, or Rondo's lack of faith that Perk will finish?

Shaq's standing reach is a lot higher than Perk's, he also has better hands. That combined with his larger bulk makes it a lot easier to lob the ball to him.

[GreenFaith1819]

Neurotic Guy - Elegantly put, and thanks! I think that sums up my thoughts exactly.

The bottom line for me? If LA tries to pound us on the boards again in June 2011, we'll be more than ready.

And I won't be on pins and needles in an ORL series vs Dwight and Gortat, or CHI (Noah, Boozer, Gibson).

We can never have too much height.

Now all we need is Sheed.........

But back to the thread at hand.

[ManUp]

Well Perk I tried to make a case for you, but Shaq is killing it right now. Ah

[GreenFaith1819]

Yeah..Shaq is playing as well as I've seen over the last few years. We certainly needed that tonight.

I still say we need Perk - even at 75-80% to get Banner 18.

Nothing wrong with extra insurance.

[snively]

Notice how happy KG is though? B/c Shaq is a breath of fresh air when it comes to passing out of the double team and he finishes instead of butterfingering the ball out of bounds.

And is it just me or does Shaq catch and finish way more alleyoops?

I would think that Perk would be more athletic at his age, but you just don't see many lobs from Rondo to Perk.
The part I want to argue/debate is it just Perk that's not smart enough to be in the right spot for lobs, or be ready to catch them, or Rondo's lack of faith that Perk will finish?

Shaq's standing reach is a lot higher than Perk's, he also has better hands. That combined with his larger bulk makes it a lot easier to lob the ball to him.

Yeah, Shaq has several inches on Perk and much bigger hands.  He's also a more fluid athlete even though he's slower and fatter. 

This also makes him a slightly better rebounder. 

Perk's discipline and heart as a team defender are special though.  And he's no slouch in the length and strength department.