Author Topic: We probably won't keep Green or Nenad so what was the point?  (Read 8055 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

We probably won't keep Green or Nenad so what was the point?
« on: February 24, 2011, 10:37:32 PM »

Offline bigwill_1234

  • Jordan Walsh
  • Posts: 22
  • Tommy Points: 1
Jeff Green is a RFA this offseason. He'll probably be able to get more money from some other team.  Would Danny really overpay for a 3-4 whose primary role is to back up PP? No. Also Nenad is a UFA. So if neither of these two re-sign with us, what was the point of trading Perk? (BTW, the Clippers #1 is top 10 protected until 2016)
So essentially, this still is a "win now" situation and Perk clearly is the better fit if we want to "win now".  I really hope Danny has some trick up his sleeve because I haven't been down with his last several moves.   

Re: We probably won't keep Green or Nenad so what was the point?
« Reply #1 on: February 24, 2011, 10:39:54 PM »

Offline Redz

  • Punner
  • Global Moderator
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31758
  • Tommy Points: 3846
  • Yup
Agreed with Nenad, but i've got to believe Green will be given an extension unless he's a total flop.
Yup

Re: We probably won't keep Green or Nenad so what was the point?
« Reply #2 on: February 24, 2011, 10:40:11 PM »

Offline rondohondo

  • NCE
  • Danny Ainge
  • **********
  • Posts: 10764
  • Tommy Points: 1196
Jeff Green is a RFA this offseason. He'll probably be able to get more money from some other team.  Would Danny really overpay for a 3-4 whose primary role is to back up PP? No. Also Nenad is a UFA. So if neither of these two re-sign with us, what was the point of trading Perk? (BTW, the Clippers #1 is top 10 protected until 2016)
So essentially, this still is a "win now" situation and Perk clearly is the better fit if we want to "win now".  I really hope Danny has some trick up his sleeve because I haven't been down with his last several moves.    

PP and KG are in their mid 30's, they wont be able to ball forever.

Green is 24 years old and has loads of potential . I think he is more of a SF, but didn't play there much because of Durant.

We need another young piece( Green) along with Rondo to attract Dwight Howard in 2012!


Re: We probably won't keep Green or Nenad so what was the point?
« Reply #3 on: February 24, 2011, 10:41:13 PM »

Offline Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 63129
  • Tommy Points: -25462
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
It's likely that Green will play out next year on his qualifying offer, and become an unrestricted free agent the following summer.


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER... AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!

KP / Giannis / Turkuglu / Jrue / Curry
Sabonis / Brand / A. Thompson / Oladipo / Brunson
Jordan / Bowen

Redshirt:  Cooper Flagg

Re: We probably won't keep Green or Nenad so what was the point?
« Reply #4 on: February 24, 2011, 10:45:07 PM »

Offline CoachBo

  • NCE
  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6069
  • Tommy Points: 336
Jeff Green is a RFA this offseason. He'll probably be able to get more money from some other team.  Would Danny really overpay for a 3-4 whose primary role is to back up PP? No. Also Nenad is a UFA. So if neither of these two re-sign with us, what was the point of trading Perk? (BTW, the Clippers #1 is top 10 protected until 2016)
So essentially, this still is a "win now" situation and Perk clearly is the better fit if we want to "win now".  I really hope Danny has some trick up his sleeve because I haven't been down with his last several moves.    

PP and KG are in their mid 30's, they wont be able to ball forever.

Green is 24 years old and has loads of potential . I think he is more of a SF, but didn't play there much because of Durant.

We need another young piece( Green) along with Rondo to attract Dwight Howard in 2012!



Agreed on all counts. It's surprised me, to say the least, how many people think that playing in the two-man iso system in OKC is an accurate predictor of what Green will do in the Boston systems, which bear no similarities whatsoever to what OKC does.

But people are angry. Today reminds me a lot of the anguish when Ainge had the temerity to break up one of the worst Celtic teams ever to get Garnett and Allen. The proof, as they say, will be in the results.

Me personally, I'm not interested in Perkins at his price with those legs. I don't make the move if Perkins is healthy and willing to resign at a price that truly reflects his skillset. But he wasn't. I'm fine with moving him.
Coined the CelticsBlog term, "Euromistake."

Re: We probably won't keep Green or Nenad so what was the point?
« Reply #5 on: February 24, 2011, 10:49:03 PM »

Offline Onslaught

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1768
  • Tommy Points: 156
Why do people think we'll get Howard? I've not seen him say anything about wanting to come to Boston. Nothing. And we didn't need to trade Perk to get him in the first place.

And even if we do get him I still don't think it would be enough to win it all. With all our old players gone and Miami probably getting a bench by that time I just don't see it happening.


I don't care about the future. I only care about this year. And I'm not sold that we have a shot at it now.

I need to walk away for a day or two. I'm rather mad about this trade. I think it was really bad. I'm not happy at all.
Peace through Tyranny

Re: We probably won't keep Green or Nenad so what was the point?
« Reply #6 on: February 24, 2011, 10:51:57 PM »

Offline CoachBo

  • NCE
  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6069
  • Tommy Points: 336
I don't think the move has a thing to do with Dwight Howard, based on the transcripts on the Web of Ainge on WEEI.

He didn't like Perkins' price or his legs. Neither do I, especially for a player with a limited offensive skillset. Danny's got to go find another rebounder to make this work, however.
Coined the CelticsBlog term, "Euromistake."

Re: We probably won't keep Green or Nenad so what was the point?
« Reply #7 on: February 24, 2011, 10:59:03 PM »

Offline rondohondo

  • NCE
  • Danny Ainge
  • **********
  • Posts: 10764
  • Tommy Points: 1196
I don't think the move has a thing to do with Dwight Howard, based on the transcripts on the Web of Ainge on WEEI.

He didn't like Perkins' price or his legs. Neither do I, especially for a player with a limited offensive skillset. Danny's got to go find another rebounder to make this work, however.

I agree the move wasn't only for the future, but it give us the chance to go after him and look like an attractive destination to Howard.

I think this is a case where Danny wants to be prepared to be able to match up with any style of play they might see in the playoffs.

They could be going up against Lebron/Bosh, Melo/Stoudamire, Odom/ Artest in the playoffs and Green allows the C's to rest KG and PP and keep them fresh without totally going down the drain on offense when those guys are out of the game.
« Last Edit: February 24, 2011, 11:09:18 PM by rondohondo »

Re: We probably won't keep Green or Nenad so what was the point?
« Reply #8 on: February 24, 2011, 11:10:55 PM »

Offline CoachBo

  • NCE
  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6069
  • Tommy Points: 336
True. There hasn't been a lot said about deficits athletically as we match up with Miami over the long haul.

We aren't a terribly athletic team, and a healthy and ponderous Perkins didn't change that.
Coined the CelticsBlog term, "Euromistake."

Re: We probably won't keep Green or Nenad so what was the point?
« Reply #9 on: February 24, 2011, 11:12:31 PM »

Offline LilRip

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6987
  • Tommy Points: 411
Howard seems disenchanted with his Magic team right now though. did u see him post-sacramento game?
- LilRip

Re: We probably won't keep Green or Nenad so what was the point?
« Reply #10 on: February 24, 2011, 11:12:57 PM »

Offline Fan from VT

  • NCE
  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4205
  • Tommy Points: 777
I would guess, (and hope), that Ainge knows that JO and Shaq are likely to be healthy, and that therefore having Davis, Perk, JO, Shaq, KG at the 4/5 with no real SF was not as good this year as Davis, JO, Shaq, KG plus a real backup SF. I hope he did not do this deal because of the draft pick he got or without being very very sure of the other bigs' health and/or very confident with some buyout options.

Re: We probably won't keep Green or Nenad so what was the point?
« Reply #11 on: February 24, 2011, 11:14:51 PM »

Offline Andy Jick

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3795
  • Tommy Points: 89
  • You know my methods, Watson.
As long as Paul, KG and Ray play another 10 years we'll be fine...

But does anyone really want to pay Perk $10 million a year for the next 4 or 5 years?  No thanks...  We need some future flexibility.  Danny has put this team in position to win, not only this year, but to keep adding for years to come.

The one thing I love about Danny is that he learned some big lessons from Red Auerbach about what NOT to do...
"It was easier to know it than to explain why I know it."

Re: We probably won't keep Green or Nenad so what was the point?
« Reply #12 on: February 24, 2011, 11:16:23 PM »

Offline bruinsandceltics

  • NGT
  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2691
  • Tommy Points: 130
  • ANYTHING is posssiiibbbbllee
 ::) Yeah, Danny traded a guy he didn't think would re-sign for a guy "he won't keep."

Talk about ridiculous thread.

Re: We probably won't keep Green or Nenad so what was the point?
« Reply #13 on: February 24, 2011, 11:18:39 PM »

Offline CoachBo

  • NCE
  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6069
  • Tommy Points: 336
As long as Paul, KG and Ray play another 10 years we'll be fine...

But does anyone really want to pay Perk $10 million a year for the next 4 or 5 years?  No thanks...  We need some future flexibility.  Danny has put this team in position to win, not only this year, but to keep adding for years to come.

The one thing I love about Danny is that he learned some big lessons from Red Auerbach about what NOT to do...

Well, obviously I wouldn't pay eight figures for Perkins' skillset. Or his legs. Tragic, in one respect, because I'd have considered 7.5 before he went down in Game 6, bad hands and bad shot notwithstanding. But not now.

Time will tell.
Coined the CelticsBlog term, "Euromistake."

Re: We probably won't keep Green or Nenad so what was the point?
« Reply #14 on: February 24, 2011, 11:29:50 PM »

Offline thunderfan

  • Neemias Queta
  • Posts: 12
  • Tommy Points: 7
Sometimes I register at other NBA forums if I have something to say, or whatever. Anyways, just reading some opinions on this trade. I'm a Thunder fan from OK. Now you guys probably haven't seen much of Nenad, but you might be surprised in what he brings to the table. Yeah he runs the floor like a doofus and he has a horrendous haircut, but he can fill it up from 18 feet.  Very sweet stroke and when he's on he's on. Great option off the pick and pop. Pretty craft around the rim too.  He lacks athleticism, but I gotta say there's been many many times where he's gone out there like a guy who just drank the blood of a rabid wolf. Very capable center at times.  I mean hell, 16 and 11 in 22 minutes against Dwight Howard earlier this season. Much different player than Perkins obviously, but you might find him to be somewhat refreshing offensively out of a center. He'll stretch the floor, I can say that. DH wouldn't step out on him and he made him pay.  

Green...well Green is a SF, plain and simple...and I think a [dang] good one too.  Green's a strong dude. Undersized at the 4, but he'll overpower most guys at the 3. Posting Green up down low on a usually undersized defender at the 3 is a very good thing for him.  Green is now the most athletic guy on the Boston roster. He can get it done...just not at the 4. I think he'll thrive at the 3.