Would "The Trade" Have Happened If Daniels Didn't Get Hurt?

[get_banners]

I don't think so. Quis was giving Pierce a solid back-up. When he went down, basically we had no quality player to spell Pierce. We absolutely needed to get one. We could have settled for a Yugo (buyouts like Rasul Butler, etc.), but we took a chance to get a Prius (Green) to back up a BMW (Pierce). I'm still okay with the trade (I think it was a fair one), but if we had a healthy Quis backing up Pierce, there would be no need for a 3, and I don't think Danny would have risked trading Perk (even if we couldn't resign him) otherwise. Fact is, without a decent backup for Paul, we had no chance at a title. So...yeah, that bizzarre and awful injury to Daniels basically changed everything for us, much like Perk's injury changed our entire offseason (which would have almost certainly seen us targeting a 3 instead of JO).

[j804]

I was going to make this exact thread about a week ago.

It's unfortunate I think we miss Quis in a lot of ways, his inside out game he lived in the paint.

[Lord_of_the17Rings]

I don't think there's any way Danny makes this trade with a healthy Daniels.  Just would not have made sense outside of Perk's contract situation and that is a "future" worry.  JG is not a big enough upgrade over Daniels in a back-up role to justify making this type of shakeup to the team late in the season.

In my opinion our Championship hopes rested on two key moments.  The first was when TA decided to leave for greener salmon and mashed potatoes.  The second was when Marquis went down and Danny was forced to make a move.  I feel if TA stays, we win 18.  If Daniels doesn't go down, we win 18.  Neither of those happened, and we'll have to see where it takes us.

On a side note, I really don't like the whole 'best player in the deal' argument.  First, what is your definition of 'best player'.  When a trade is made between guys of different positions, how do you make that determination?  Are you going based on offensive production? Who's game looks prettier?  Who got drafted earlier?  I've just never understood that argument - at least not for players of different positions, and not in the case of this trade. What makes JG better than Perk?  Is JG on a higher ranking for forwards, than Perk is for Centers? I don't buy that.  And if that is not the argument, what does it mean to say JG is the best player in the trade?  Just my thoughts on that whole thing.

[Roy H.]

On a side note, I really don't like the whole 'best player in the deal' argument. 

Agreed.  Also, if people are going to go down that road, I think that since Perk's "value" was Jeff Green, Nenad Krstic, a potential lottery pick, and clearing one year of Nate's contract, it can be argued that he was seen as by far the best player in the trade.  Otherwise, Sam Presti is the biggest fool in the NBA.

[Drucci]

I'm not sure Danny was confident going into the playoffs with Marquis as the only backup, even if he stayed healthy at the time.

I think that if Marquis didn't get hurt Danny would have traded Nate for a wing/guard (like Anthony Parker), kept Perk, and then sign and traded him in the offseason for Green.

[RAcker]

I'm not sure Danny was confident going into the playoffs with Marquis as the only backup, even if he stayed healthy at the time.

I think that if Marquis didn't get hurt Danny would have traded Nate for a wing/guard (like Anthony Parker), kept Perk, and then sign and traded him in the offseason for Green.

This is probably not that far off.  We'll never know, but I think Danny was shaky on Marquis before he went down.

[BudweiserCeltic]

On a side note, I really don't like the whole 'best player in the deal' argument.  

Agreed.  Also, if people are going to go down that road, I think that since Perk's "value" was Jeff Green, Nenad Krstic, a potential lottery pick, and clearing one year of Nate's contract, it can be argued that he was seen as by far the best player in the trade.  Otherwise, Sam Presti is the biggest fool in the NBA.

Not if he was confident that he could get an extension out of Perk, in an area where he actually had need. It might speak into Presti's desperate need for defensive size, rather than value of the players involved.

[fairweatherfan]

On a side note, I really don't like the whole 'best player in the deal' argument. 

Agreed.  Also, if people are going to go down that road, I think that since Perk's "value" was Jeff Green, Nenad Krstic, a potential lottery pick, and clearing one year of Nate's contract, it can be argued that he was seen as by far the best player in the trade.  Otherwise, Sam Presti is the biggest fool in the NBA.

I don't really understand the argument that OKC got a better deal because they gave up so much.  Would Perk have less value if we had thrown in a first instead of them?

Value is always relative to each team's situation.  Presti gave up two redundant players he wasn't going to sign this offseason, and got the exact piece he's been craving for a couple of years now, probably with some unofficial indications that Perk would take his extension too.  The pick was probably the only thing that hurt to lose, and with top-10 protection it's not likely to be a great player there either.

As for the main question, I think it's very debatable whether Perk or Green would be the best player for this team, this season.  But I don't think it's debatable that Green has greater overall ability and the higher ceiling of the two.

[bbd24]

On a side note, I really don't like the whole 'best player in the deal' argument. 

Agreed.  Also, if people are going to go down that road, I think that since Perk's "value" was Jeff Green, Nenad Krstic, a potential lottery pick, and clearing one year of Nate's contract, it can be argued that he was seen as by far the best player in the trade.  Otherwise, Sam Presti is the biggest fool in the NBA.

You guys are probably right.  Knowing Danny's track record, the best player in the deal is probably the 1st round Clipper pick.

Right now though, its easily Jeff Green.  Its not even close.

[Roy H.]

On a side note, I really don't like the whole 'best player in the deal' argument. 

Agreed.  Also, if people are going to go down that road, I think that since Perk's "value" was Jeff Green, Nenad Krstic, a potential lottery pick, and clearing one year of Nate's contract, it can be argued that he was seen as by far the best player in the trade.  Otherwise, Sam Presti is the biggest fool in the NBA.

You guys are probably right.  Knowing Danny's track record, the best player in the deal is probably the 1st round Clipper pick.

Right now though, its easily Jeff Green.  Its not even close.

You're entitled to your opinion, I guess.  Again, though, it just strikes me as odd that Sam Presti is fairly well regarded in NBA circles, despite clearly having just fallen off the turnip truck.

[bbd24]

On a side note, I really don't like the whole 'best player in the deal' argument. 

Agreed.  Also, if people are going to go down that road, I think that since Perk's "value" was Jeff Green, Nenad Krstic, a potential lottery pick, and clearing one year of Nate's contract, it can be argued that he was seen as by far the best player in the trade.  Otherwise, Sam Presti is the biggest fool in the NBA.

You guys are probably right.  Knowing Danny's track record, the best player in the deal is probably the 1st round Clipper pick.

Right now though, its easily Jeff Green.  Its not even close.

You're entitled to your opinion, I guess.  Again, though, it just strikes me as odd that Sam Presti is fairly well regarded in NBA circles, despite clearly having just fallen off the turnip truck.

I like Presti.  I like Ainge more.  Whose the best player in the deal to you ? Perk ? The best player IMO overall was Jeff Green.  There really isn't an argument and I love Perk. Perk was a fine role player.  Green is more than a role player.

If we want another role player in the future, can't the same GM who drafted Perkins late find one with where the Clipper pick resides ?  I have to think he'll find that and then some.  Obviously he'll have to wait, but eventually down the road thats another solid addition.

[Onslaught]

I dont' see Green as a star player. To me he's a little better then a roll player. And so was Perk.

I think many of you are blowing Green out of proportion.

[Chris]

On a side note, I really don't like the whole 'best player in the deal' argument. 

Agreed.  Also, if people are going to go down that road, I think that since Perk's "value" was Jeff Green, Nenad Krstic, a potential lottery pick, and clearing one year of Nate's contract, it can be argued that he was seen as by far the best player in the trade.  Otherwise, Sam Presti is the biggest fool in the NBA.

Eh, I think that is an oversimplification.  I would say that Perkins was the more valuable player, because it is harder to find guys like that, but that doesn't mean he is the "best" player.

Ultimately, I think this was a situation where you have one team who desperately needed a guy like Perk, and was willing to overpay for him, and you had a team with the depth to be able to let a guy like that go, and a need for a guy like Green.

This is one of the rare NBA trades where I think both teams really got what they wanted.

[mgent]

Here's what Danny said on this subject at the time of the trade:

On if any of the would have happened if Daniels wouldn't have gotten injured:

"I felt like our team was going good, playing very well. Marquis’ versatility. But I guess once we started looking for those wing players, I guess it did change a little bit. All the injuries we had. I think injuries have played a part in what we’ve tried to do to prepare us for this postseason."

Link.

I don't think Danny would have made the trade with a healthy Marquis, because there would have been no need to tamper with something that wasn't broken.

Do you really think we were "broken" without Marquis though?  As long as we still got Pavlovic (or Parker, maybe even Brewer because we would've had the minutes) did Marquis Daniels really leave a big enough hole that we had to disrupt championship chemistry to replace him?

I would've been perfectly fine with a Nate/Delonte/Pavlovic rotation.  And this was back before Wafer got injured, who I think would be more than good enough as the third perimeter guy off the bench.

[Roy H.]

On a side note, I really don't like the whole 'best player in the deal' argument. 

Agreed.  Also, if people are going to go down that road, I think that since Perk's "value" was Jeff Green, Nenad Krstic, a potential lottery pick, and clearing one year of Nate's contract, it can be argued that he was seen as by far the best player in the trade.  Otherwise, Sam Presti is the biggest fool in the NBA.

You guys are probably right.  Knowing Danny's track record, the best player in the deal is probably the 1st round Clipper pick.

Right now though, its easily Jeff Green.  Its not even close.

You're entitled to your opinion, I guess.  Again, though, it just strikes me as odd that Sam Presti is fairly well regarded in NBA circles, despite clearly having just fallen off the turnip truck.

I like Presti.  I like Ainge more.  Whose the best player in the deal to you ? Perk ? The best player IMO overall was Jeff Green.  There really isn't an argument and I love Perk. Perk was a fine role player.  Green is more than a role player.

If we want another role player in the future, can't the same GM who drafted Perkins late find one with where the Clipper pick resides ?  I have to think he'll find that and then some.  Obviously he'll have to wait, but eventually down the road thats another solid addition.

Green is an average starting small forward, in my eyes.

Perk is an above-average starting center.

You can argue over who is more important, but to me saying that Green is "by far" better doesn't ring true, especially when a pretty savvy GM decided that the gap between Perk and Green was worth a starting center (Krstic), a potential lottery pick, and Nate Robinson's salary next year.