is kendrick perkins a top 10 center?

[greg_kite]

Maybe a better question to ask is what centers does Perk compare to?  Let's face it, if this guy was on a bad, non-playoff team, he would not have much of a name around the league.  Even a guy like TA drew some FA attention because he played for a winning team. 

I don't see much difference between Perk and Erick Dampier or Jamaal Magloire.  He's better than them currently but at their peaks they were actually slightly better than Perk.

[Chief]

It would be closer to 10-15. Top 5 defensive though.

[Fan from VT]

Don't forget Okafor. I think people would go crazy for him if he were on the Celts; he could do everything Perk is asked to do defensively and rebounding, but be better on offense, slightly better at help defense, and can do it for about 8 more minutes per game.

[Celtics17]

Defensively Perk is a top 3 center and in many situations the best. Offensively, I doubt he is in the top 20 but that is not his game.

[fmf2]

I do not agree that he is, but he is close. It is important to remember that other centers may be more talented, but not as VALUABLE...there is a big difference.

A good test is to honestly guess if a sane GM would trade other centers for him straight up. The centers who good GMs would not give up for him are: Howard, Duncan, Gasol, Bynum, Noah, Nene, Bogut, B. Lopez, Biendris, Horford.

Since no one wanted to give Shaq more than an inexpensive contract this summer, it does not seem logical to list him as more valuable or "better" than Perk. He may be a good enough fit to bring a banner, but that does not mean he is a better player.

My question is, and I think this is important...will Perk continue to improve or has his talent level reached its ceiling? Although I would expect his mobility and athleticism to get better over the next few months ( as is usually the case post surgery), I wonder if he can take his game to another level.

I would also have concerns about his shoulders. There is an injury history there that (IMO) many have overlooked during the past few days.   

There is a good chance that Green can get to another level.   

[droponov]

Better than Perkins:
Dwight Howard
Andrew Bogut
Andrew Bynum
Pau Gasol
Tim Duncan
Tyson Chandler
Nene
Al Horford
Joakim Noah
Anderson Varejao
Marc Gasol?
Marcin Gortat?

Similar to Perkins (players who are better in some situations, for some teams, worse in others - for the Celtics, Perkins' contributions are more valuable):
Roy Hibbert
Chris Kamman
Brook Lopez
Al Jefferson

Similar in value:
Gortat, Gasol, Emeka Okafor, Marcus Camby?

Role-players like Perkins and most of these guys are so much about fit and having the right skill-set for the situation that these rankings are a bit useless, but I'd say he's around the 15th best center in the league.

[Fafnir]

No he's not.

He's a top 10 defensive center, but he's a liability at the other end. That drags him down below a lot of other Cs.

[PosImpos]

Nope.

[footey]

When healthy, I thought Perk was the 3rd best center on our team behind Shaq and JO.  Now that's purely in terms of overall talent.  Of course Shaq and JO's realiability hurts them and increased Perk's value to the team considerably.

Maybe a better question to ask is what centers does Perk compare to?  Let's face it, if this guy was on a bad, non-playoff team, he would not have much of a name around the league.  Even a guy like TA drew some FA attention because he played for a winning team. 

Agreed. TP

[birdwatcher]

Better than Perkins:
Dwight Howard
Andrew Bogut
Andrew Bynum
Pau Gasol
Tim Duncan
Tyson Chandler
Nene
Al Horford
Joakim Noah
Anderson Varejao
Marc Gasol?
Marcin Gortat?

Similar to Perkins (players who are better in some situations, for some teams, worse in others - for the Celtics, Perkins' contributions are more valuable):
Roy Hibbert
Chris Kamman
Brook Lopez
Al Jefferson

Similar in value:
Gortat, Gasol, Emeka Okafor, Marcus Camby?

Role-players like Perkins and most of these guys are so much about fit and having the right skill-set for the situation that these rankings are a bit useless, but I'd say he's around the 15th best center in the league.

solid assessment. Although, I think that you're under rating Roy Hibbert, who after as many years exp as Perk will be waaay better. Also, Brook Lopez is a very, very good offensive center. It's hard to say if Perk's defense trumps Lopez's overall game.

[filmexec]

I think the proper questions are:

             1. Is Perkins a top 10 Defensive Center? Yes!

             2. Is Perkins a top 10 Offensive Center? No!

             3. Is Perkins a top 10 overall Center? Maybe?

That being said Perk was the perfect fit for the Celtics and I will miss him. I remember a pudgy Kid from Texas that through dedication became a quality NBA Center. But remember out 40-14 record was done primarily without Perk! Shaq and Jermaine are fragile but they (when healthy) are competent and an adequate replacement for Perk.. That is why signing another player like Troy Murphy is so vital for rebounding and toughness. And speaking of Toughness I hope we re-sign Leon Powe as well? In Green we will be able to give Pierce "Quality" Rest. I'm old enough to remember when we had a back up SF called Scotty Wedman for Larry Bird, I see this as similar. We can't afford to let Pierce to wear down by the playoffs by playing him to many minutes? OMHO!

[csfansince60s]

I think the OP's question could be rephrased with a qualifier in front of it.

Perhaps it should read "If Perk is healthy  is he a top 10 center?", because the jury is certainly still out on that one.

[action781]

If you are trying to rank players in a "top 10" or "top 5" or whatever, then you are comparing them with other players, which means you must do so objectively.  This means you must disregard what team the player is on and consider the player by himself.

Most people on this board would agree that Perkins is a better C than Cousins at this very moment (I would).  But if you replaced Cousins with Perkins on the Kings, that team would instantly (and miraculously) get worse.  I can think of maybe 5 other teams in the league that Cousins would be a better fit at C for than Perkins.  That doesn't mean Cousins is a better C.  Perkins has benefitted from fitting into this team very well and it has made him look really good. So, you can't consider the Perkins that is a celtic and how he impacts this team, you need to consider him as a player and how he would fit into the majority of teams.

[Jon]

I like Perk.  My knee-jerk reaction was not to like this deal.  I voted "no" on the poll on the front page after it happened.

However, I am starting to warm to it. 

Perk is a heck of a defender.  I'll give him that.  As a rebounder, he's fairly average.  At times people questioned whether Dennis Rodman's rebounding numbers were inflated since he clearly didn't try to score, asking what would happen if Charles Barkley decided to give up scoring and only focus on rebounding?  My question is why Kendrick Perkins, a player with little offensive game, couldn't rebound more than he did.  Now, I realize that had Kendrick played 36 mpg like some other league leaders, he'd likely get 10 boards a game.  However, given that Kendrick was a net loss on offense, you'd expect him to make up for it even more so on the boards.

Also, let's not romanticize 2008.  Remember it was P.J. Brown hitting the long jumper and having his hand in LeBron's face Game 7 in Cleveland and it was Posey knocking down Big 3s in LA at the end of games. 

Again, that's not a knock on Perk.  If I was Ainge, I'm not sure I'd make the trade.  However, Perk has flaws and we certainly have played around them. 

And if you're a top 10 center, you probably should be playing in crunchtime. 

[Celtic#9]

To a team that is not a contender he is not very important. He is not a player you can build a team around. He is really only good on 1 end of the floor. Many people don't like players like Ellis or Melo or any other player who has an allergy to defense. They play one 1 end of the floor. Perk just happens to play the other. He is a great rebounder and very turnover prone. Not to mention the injury.