Top 5 reasons you can't blame: Danny Ainge for trading Perkins to the Thunder

[Eric_Suede]

I agree with the 5 reasons. I think the outrage boils down to 2 things.

#1 Emotion. It's debatable how important Perk was to this franchise but we've gotten used to seeing him in Green.

#2 Short Term Memory. In other words many people forgot the points you brought out which led us to #17. People haven't thought back that far. Only think in the hearts & minds of many C's fans is game 7 of last year's finals in which we lost that game SOLELY because we got killed on the boards. The sentiment ever since that game has been "Man if we had Perk, we'd be going for #19 right now" So I think people are stuck on that "If we had perk" Idea as if he is absolutely necessary to have in order to win.

I feel like many others. I hated to see him go (plus maybe he needs to grow on me , but Green doesn't thrill me) But I think Shaq will play the Perk role Very well if not better. Thing is with him will he be healthy. that's my fear. It's fair to say Shaq has been just as injury proned & he's older. Actually oldest NBA player right now.

[Fred Roberts]

I love Perk like the rest of us, and felt like the wind was knocked out of me when he got traded. We WILL miss his toughness. Add as many 7 footers as you like, but the strength and beef and defensive prowess WILL be missed.

However, I recall the plantar faciatis (sp?) in the early days. One (or 2) shoulder surgeries ... and then a knee issue (or two). The guy is/was a warrior, but the injury prone point has some validity for me.

This is somewhat unrelated to the post, BUT ... I think it should also be noted that the Celtics organization showed IMMENSE faith and spent $10M+ "investing" in Perk's development before he really produced much of anything as a pro. That entire rookie deal was pretty much spent not knowing if he'd develop or not. The Celtics got great value on the 2nd Perk contract, but bear in mind Perk signed that while he was injured with no guarantees that he'd ever really produce. Hence, the Celtics showed Perk incredible faith and gave him stability for a long long time.

I'm happy they did, and I'm sure he's happy we did. I guess what I'm getting at is that I am ready to buy into the new squad (after a few days to exhale), and I'm happy about Perk's past as a Celtic and think it was very fair for Perk, the Celtics and us fans.

[Roy H.]

I agree with the 5 reasons. I think the outrage boils down to 2 things.

#1 Emotion. It's debatable how important Perk was to this franchise but we've gotten used to seeing him in Green.

#2 Short Term Memory. In other words many people forgot the points you brought out which led us to #17. People haven't thought back that far. Only think in the hearts & minds of many C's fans is game 7 of last year's finals in which we lost that game SOLELY because we got killed on the boards. The sentiment ever since that game has been "Man if we had Perk, we'd be going for #19 right now" So I think people are stuck on that "If we had perk" Idea as if he is absolutely necessary to have in order to win.

I feel like many others. I hated to see him go (plus maybe he needs to grow on me , but Green doesn't thrill me) But I think Shaq will play the Perk role Very well if not better. Thing is with him will he be healthy. that's my fear. It's fair to say Shaq has been just as injury proned & he's older. Actually oldest NBA player right now.

I think there are some pretty intelligent analysts and posters who haven't liked the trade a whole lot, and I think it's dismissive to suggest that the only reasons they don't like the deal are because of emotional attachment and/or being out of touch with historical reality.

I mean, you yourself cite Shaq's health as a concern.  Others have pointed out concerns like chemistry, the short time period to work a ton of new guys into the lineup, the loss of defense, the loss of rebounding, etc.  Aren't those concerns real ones, rather than emotional ones?

[Eric_Suede]

I agree with the 5 reasons. I think the outrage boils down to 2 things.

#1 Emotion. It's debatable how important Perk was to this franchise but we've gotten used to seeing him in Green.

#2 Short Term Memory. In other words many people forgot the points you brought out which led us to #17. People haven't thought back that far. Only think in the hearts & minds of many C's fans is game 7 of last year's finals in which we lost that game SOLELY because we got killed on the boards. The sentiment ever since that game has been "Man if we had Perk, we'd be going for #19 right now" So I think people are stuck on that "If we had perk" Idea as if he is absolutely necessary to have in order to win.

I feel like many others. I hated to see him go (plus maybe he needs to grow on me , but Green doesn't thrill me) But I think Shaq will play the Perk role Very well if not better. Thing is with him will he be healthy. that's my fear. It's fair to say Shaq has been just as injury proned & he's older. Actually oldest NBA player right now.

I think there are some pretty intelligent analysts and posters who haven't liked the trade a whole lot, and I think it's dismissive to suggest that the only reasons they don't like the deal are because of emotional attachment and/or being out of touch with historical reality.

I mean, you yourself cite Shaq's health as a concern.  Others have pointed out concerns like chemistry, the short time period to work a ton of new guys into the lineup, the loss of defense, the loss of rebounding, etc.  Aren't those concerns real ones, rather than emotional ones?

I see what you're saying but I moreso agree with the OP with the sentiment that Perk doesn't bring anything to the table that is unable to be brought by someone else. Namely Shaq. I think a healthy Shaq is better than Perk. Surely is bigger. So I by no means want to seem as if i'm dismissing other people's analysis as not wise but at the same time I think we're overrating Perk a bit. Most of the pain stems from emotion.

[wdleehi]

I agree with the 5 reasons. I think the outrage boils down to 2 things.

#1 Emotion. It's debatable how important Perk was to this franchise but we've gotten used to seeing him in Green.

#2 Short Term Memory. In other words many people forgot the points you brought out which led us to #17. People haven't thought back that far. Only think in the hearts & minds of many C's fans is game 7 of last year's finals in which we lost that game SOLELY because we got killed on the boards. The sentiment ever since that game has been "Man if we had Perk, we'd be going for #19 right now" So I think people are stuck on that "If we had perk" Idea as if he is absolutely necessary to have in order to win.

I feel like many others. I hated to see him go (plus maybe he needs to grow on me , but Green doesn't thrill me) But I think Shaq will play the Perk role Very well if not better. Thing is with him will he be healthy. that's my fear. It's fair to say Shaq has been just as injury proned & he's older. Actually oldest NBA player right now.

I think there are some pretty intelligent analysts and posters who haven't liked the trade a whole lot, and I think it's dismissive to suggest that the only reasons they don't like the deal are because of emotional attachment and/or being out of touch with historical reality.

I mean, you yourself cite Shaq's health as a concern.  Others have pointed out concerns like chemistry, the short time period to work a ton of new guys into the lineup, the loss of defense, the loss of rebounding, etc.  Aren't those concerns real ones, rather than emotional ones?

I see what you're saying but I moreso agree with the OP with the sentiment that Perk doesn't bring anything to the table that is unable to be brought by someone else. Namely Shaq. I think a healthy Shaq is better than Perk. Surely is bigger. So I by no means want to seem as if i'm dismissing other people's analysis as not wise but at the same time I think we're overrating Perk a bit. Most of the pain stems from emotion.

Perk is still the better defender.  Especially in the pick and roll.


More importantly, the two of them together is enough to wear out any big man in a 7 game series. 

[mgent]

Someone was arguing with me earlier that Perk is injury prone and likely wouldn't be healthy in the finals.  Where the heck did this idea come from?

People also seem to be forgetting that Perk shoots one of the highest percentages in the league.

Benefit of having 3 hall of famers get all the attention with a pass first point guard in Rondo...

So he doesn't have "no skill to score in the post?"  His teammates obviously helped but he's not nearly as bad as you're trying to make him sound: "Teams playing 5 on 4"  Exaggerate much?

[Celtics4ever]

Its not his shooting that bothered me, he rarely shot more than a layup or dunk but he was not the best at catching the ball.  I can recall him baubling passes from Rajon all the time and cringing when he shot at times.   He wasn't bad he just wasn't spectacular.  Average offensively he averaged over 2 TO's a game last year and the year before so don't tell me he doesn't bauble the ball sometimes because he does.

The last six games his played for us opposing centers averaged 15 points per game against his vaulted defense.  I think the playoff injurt hurt his mobility and it definitely hurt his lift.  I recall one play back where both he front rimmed a dunk.  He was never a high flyer on his dunks and vertical has never been his strength.  But he has lost a step and some lift.

Sure the stats say KP is a better shooter than NK.  But that really isn't true is it.   One shoots jumpers the other only garbage shots down low.   Nenad is the better FT shooter by 12% points.   If he stuck to layups he would be better than KP.  Free throws are very good indicator of shooting touch.     72% Krstic to 60% Perkins on free throw shooting.  Common sense says a guy that shoots layups is going to make more than a guy who shoots 15 footers but common sense is not common, I guess. 

There is plenty good about Kendrick Perkins.  He added a lot of intangibles and toughness to the team.  The dude was a total warrior who gave his all whether rehab or on the court.  Sometimes he let his emotions get the better on him but more often than not he fired up his team mates.

I think the top reason this trade was made was Jeff Green to add to Rondo.  Danny doesn't want us to go back into the gutter.  This was clearly a gamble now to pay off down the line.  It adds a flexibilty we didn't have before with the power three.  Center is the least important component on the present Celtic team.  Heck, we won games with Semih Erden in there.

This is a good read:
http://www.nesn.com/2011/02/how-the-celtics-can-still-win-without-kendrick-perkins.html

[Onslaught]

Someone was arguing with me earlier that Perk is injury prone and likely wouldn't be healthy in the finals.  Where the heck did this idea come from?

People also seem to be forgetting that Perk shoots one of the highest percentages in the league.

Benefit of having 3 hall of famers get all the attention with a pass first point guard in Rondo...

He took advantage of that and did his job. I can think of guys who would probably fail if you gave them the same chance. Like Kwame Brown.

[Megatron]

Someone was arguing with me earlier that Perk is injury prone and likely wouldn't be healthy in the finals.  Where the heck did this idea come from?

People also seem to be forgetting that Perk shoots one of the highest percentages in the league.

Benefit of having 3 hall of famers get all the attention with a pass first point guard in Rondo...

So he doesn't have "no skill to score in the post?"  His teammates obviously helped but he's not nearly as bad as you're trying to make him sound: "Teams playing 5 on 4"  Exaggerate much?

Have you forgotten last season? We had offensive droughts.

Rondo + Perk being non factors on offense = Ray + Pierce + KG being double teamed and shooting jumpers.

We would go through 5-8 minute stretches in games where we couldnt score because it was too hard for the Big 3 to score against double teams and bricking jumpers.

We didnt have a single one of those droughts all year when Shaq was in the lineup beacuse teams cant double team any of our guys.

[LooseCannon]

How often did you think "The Celtics need to run more plays for Perkins in the post"?

[BudweiserCeltic]

How often did you think "The Celtics need to run more plays for Perkins in the post"?

Only when we needed to motivate him to be more active rebounding and playing defense.

[OsirusCeltics]

Someone was arguing with me earlier that Perk is injury prone and likely wouldn't be healthy in the finals.  Where the heck did this idea come from?

People also seem to be forgetting that Perk shoots one of the highest percentages in the league.

Benefit of having 3 hall of famers get all the attention with a pass first point guard in Rondo...

So he doesn't have "no skill to score in the post?"  His teammates obviously helped but he's not nearly as bad as you're trying to make him sound: "Teams playing 5 on 4"  Exaggerate much?

No but seriously, teams were doing that. Perk is obviously not terrible. But his offense was a liability like I explained. Teams do play 5 on 4 on the Celtics. Dwight Howard is able to roam and block shots with him not worrying about Perkins scoring. Teams would also be able to double KG in the post or Ray on the perimeter. This is the reason this team goes on offensive lulls. They become easier to defend

[GreenFaith1819]

My question is:

Would this trade have happened if Marquis hadn't went down?

[droponov]

I see what you're saying but I moreso agree with the OP with the sentiment that Perk doesn't bring anything to the table that is unable to be brought by someone else. Namely Shaq. I think a healthy Shaq is better than Perk. Surely is bigger. So I by no means want to seem as if i'm dismissing other people's analysis as not wise but at the same time I think we're overrating Perk a bit. Most of the pain stems from emotion.

Shaq is a huge defensive liability and doesn't rebound nearly as well as Perkins.

Jermaine O'Neal is way more vital to the Celtics title hopes than Shaq.

Defense and rebounding wins playoffs series.

[KevinGamble]

I think one point that you make that could turn out to be the biggest is the injury bug.  Sure ALL our bigs have had injuries, but LESS than one year after major knee surgery, I think we can all agree that Perk is not all the way back and whether or not he would have been BEFORE straining his MCL is debatable.

This reminds me of the Nomar trade in that regard.  His health was iffy and 50 50 for the rest of the year, too.  In this trade we get one healthy upgrade at backup center, and get desperately needed athleticism to help out with Lebron and other quality opponents we are likely to see in the playoffs.  

Like the Nomar trade, it was a win-now strategy due to injuries and in Perk's case getting to his 100% old self

Go Celts!