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

[Roy H.]

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.

You misunderstand me.  I don't think the team was "broken" either way.  However, Danny did after Marquis went down.

I do think that going into Pavlovic would have hurt, but there were other SFs available, including Anthony Parker (who is a perfectly acceptable stop-gap).

[winsomme]

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.

I think it's a bit irrelevant who is better. They're very different players for sure.

For me, the question is who would help the Cs win more...and in that regard I would take the defense-minded starting center that we have won with over the backup SF who plays questionable defense.

[Prof. Clutch]

Great question, TP.

My gut feeling is that they wouldn't have made a move if Daniels hadn't been injured since they were playing so well and everything seemed to be clicking nicely.  Despite what Danny said in the quote Roy posted, I can't imagine he wasn't satisfied with the team the way it was constituted.

[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.

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.

I think it's a bit irrelevant who is better. They're very different players for sure.

For me, the question is who would help the Cs win more...and in that regard I would take the defense-minded starting center that we have won with over the backup SF who plays questionable defense.

And I would go with Green/Krstic.  But you are right, about that being the relevant question.  And unfortunately, we won't have an answer for another couple of months.

[soap07]

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.

This is a gross oversimplification, and I would guess that you know that. I don't want to get into the individual specifics of the trade again.  But if you took Perk's free agent status out of it and the needs of each specific teams, most NBA GMs would say that Green is by far the better value.

The Thunder were a bad defensive team and needed a defensive big man badly. So for them, it was worth trading a starting big man who is deficient in that category along with Green, who was playing out of position and didn't fit in with the Thunder. The Thunder could afford to give those pieces up with no problem because they had an abundance of the skills that Krstic and Green filled.

[Roy H.]

. . . most NBA GMs would say that Green is by far the better value.

Link?

[soap07]

I do think that going into Pavlovic would have hurt, but there were other SFs available, including Anthony Parker (who is a perfectly acceptable stop-gap).

Come on, seriously? Since when is Anthony Parker an acceptable 6th man for a championship team?

[soap07]

. . . most NBA GMs would say that Green is by far the better value.

Link?

An assumption. I can't seem to find the NBA.com preseason survey of "Who would you rather have, Kendrick Perkins or Jeff Green, assuming that free agency and the surrounding makeup of your team isn't a factor?"

[Roy H.]

I do think that going into Pavlovic would have hurt, but there were other SFs available, including Anthony Parker (who is a perfectly acceptable stop-gap).

Come on, seriously? Since when is Anthony Parker an acceptable 6th man for a championship team?

First, who said he was going to be our "6th man"?  Second, Anthony Parker was the starter on a team that won 61 games last year, so asking him to fill a bench role on another contender isn't exactly a bridge too far.

[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.

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.

Green being average is where I disagree.  I just don't see it.  He's just getting his feet wet in the league.  Especially where he's coming from.

He's got a shot, great speed for his size, length, and his versatility is off the charts.  Still only 24 years of age.  Now he gets to the learn from one of the best Celtics of all time.  Defensively, now, yeah, he might be average.  Thats the only average part of his game for me.  I think that gets better, and better, and better in time.  Couple that with his offensive game and you have a star whose ready to bust out.

[Chris]

I do think that going into Pavlovic would have hurt, but there were other SFs available, including Anthony Parker (who is a perfectly acceptable stop-gap).

Come on, seriously? Since when is Anthony Parker an acceptable 6th man for a championship team?

First, who said he was going to be our "6th man"?  Second, Anthony Parker was the starter on a team that won 61 games last year, so asking him to fill a bench role on another contender isn't exactly a bridge too far.

I am curious what it would have taken to get Parker.  I think it would have taken the first round pick, and the rumors about Semih were not true (I think it was an assumption someone made after Cleveland asked Chicago for Asik, who is a significantly better prospect, and assumed they would make the same offer for Semih), based on the fact that if the C's could have sent Semih for Parker, they would have done that, rather than the worthless second rounder, and going after lesser players like Brewer and Sasha after buyouts.

Not that the first round pick is that valuable, I just think it is interesting after those "rumors" came out.  

[soap07]

First, who said he was going to be our "6th man"?  Second, Anthony Parker was the starter on a team that won 61 games last year, so asking him to fill a bench role on another contender isn't exactly a bridge too far.

Okay, let me try again. Considering the amount energy that players such as Ray Allen and Paul Pierce will spend in the playoffs both offensively and defensively guarding the LeBron James, Luol Deng's, and Dwyane Wade's of the world, in what world is Anthony Parker an acceptable back-up swingman for a championship team?

And by the way, Anthony Parker being a starter on that team is more of a testament to how weak LeBron's supporting cast was last season. He's been a below average basketball player his whole career.

[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.

Green being average is where I disagree.  I just don't see it.  He's just getting his feet wet in the league.  Especially where he's coming from.

He's got a shot, great speed for his size, length, and his versatility is off the charts.  Still only 24 years of age.  Now he gets to the learn from one of the best Celtics of all time.  Defensively, now, yeah, he might be average.  Thats the only average part of his game for me.  I think that gets better, and better, and better in time.  Couple that with his offensive game and you have a star whose ready to bust out.

What makes him better than, say, Corey Maggette (other than the fact that he doesn't get to the line)?

Green is maybe an above-average scorer (and really, he's about average in that regard this year).  He's a below average rebounder, passer, and defender, though.  To me, that equates to a pretty average starting small forward.

He may make a leap in his play, but then again, he may not.

[winsomme]

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.

Green being average is where I disagree.  I just don't see it.  He's just getting his feet wet in the league.  Especially where he's coming from.

He's got a shot, great speed for his size, length, and his versatility is off the charts.  Still only 24 years of age.  Now he gets to the learn from one of the best Celtics of all time.  Defensively, now, yeah, he might be average.  Thats the only average part of his game for me.  I think that gets better, and better, and better in time.  Couple that with his offensive game and you have a star whose ready to bust out.

he's a nice offensive player and he's strong and athletic but he is surprisingly poor on defense. I'm not sure if it's instincts or what it is...he just seems behind the play a lot of times.

It's too bad because given his physical tools he should be a beast.

[2short]

quick snippets on entire 4 pages here
green is the best player in the trade imo, he is a fringe all star as someone put in another post andre iguadoa or danny granger like who will end up with pp spot some day in the future, as a sf he is a good solid starter
perk is a solid starter with this team/kg
the nba is so center weak that perk is probably solid in the middle of the pack, years past perk would be a backup without a doubt
I actually feel krstic is as good a center as perk but they are apples & oranges so it does no good to compare them at all
I think both the thunder & celtics will benefit from the trade, of course drinking green wine right now I feel the celtics got the better deal
daniels I always really liked his game, he was a "glue" guy who's stats might not show up being that great but he would play good-very good defense, good ball handler, good passer etc
A guy I would love to have as swing man with this team, 3rd string sf and depending on matchups sg backup (2nd or 3rd).  When daniels got hurt we lost a ball handler for second unit and the only true backup to pierce.  Granted against sf in playoffs (lebron, carmelo etc) daniels was physically small.  Green gives us a very athletic YOUNG 6'9" sf who can run the big pf and defend the big sf.  With all the movement danny did he netted (pun intended!) green, a backup center who can spread the floor with jump shots and passing, a true backup pg in arroyo and another big murphy who if ever gets back will offer us a fair amount.
I think if daniels didn't get hurt danny would have still gone after a sf, it was our glaring weak spot but with perk hurt, shaq old and tired and jermaine...who?  We needed to do something.

since reading some other posts  I would like to add, i see green as being a good defender maybe not against a power power forward but I've seen nice shot blocking, good foot work and he isn't afraid to be physical.