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

[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.

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.

Maggette is a solid comparison although Green apparently is a really good guy where as Maggette has been noted for being not a great teammate.

I really want Green to be good but I'm just not seeing the fire in his eyes...

[Cman]

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

Agreed.  
For example, its not much comfort to Knicks fans knowing that they got Melo, when they've been losing so much (and especially whereas Denver's been on a tear).

[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.

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.

I think you are overstating your case a bit.  Green is a below average rebounder as a PF, and I think he is unproven as a SF (I think he has the skills to be better than he has shown in the limited minutes he has played at SF).  More importantly though, I absolutely do not think he is a below average defender or passer.  I think he is a slightly above average SF defender, with the potential to get better with more experience at the position, and I think he is a well above average passer.

I think offensively he is very comparable to Deng.  He has a similarly passive game, but, like Deng, can hit the open shot, can post up smaller men, can pass the ball (but is not a strong enough ball handler to be a true point forward), and has an uncanny ability to find the open spot on the floor.

Unfortunately, he is not in Deng's class defensively.

If I were to compare him to a current player overall, I would say Marvin Williams.  A lot of talent, very solid jack of all trades, but never showing the aggression, or excelling enough at any one part of the game to become a star. 

I do think your right though that he should be a middle of the road starting SF.  I don't think he will ever be a star, but he also will never be someone who you really feel shouldn't be a starter on a good team. 

[Roy H.]

More importantly though, I absolutely do not think he is a below average defender or passer.

Without going point by point, Chris, in what regard is Green anything but a below average passer? 

[winsomme]

If I were to compare him to a current player overall, I would say Marvin Williams.  A lot of talent, very solid jack of all trades, but never showing the aggression, or excelling enough at any one part of the game to become a star. 

don't you think, Chris, talent evaluation aside (we all will have some differences here and there on him) that trading for a guy who lacks that aggression is not what we should be doing...

I mean, our whole bag has been playing with an edge and have succeeded with players who play that way...

[Chris]

If I were to compare him to a current player overall, I would say Marvin Williams.  A lot of talent, very solid jack of all trades, but never showing the aggression, or excelling enough at any one part of the game to become a star. 

don't you think, Chris, talent evaluation aside (we all will have some differences here and there on him) that trading for a guy who lacks that aggression is not what we should be doing...

I mean, our whole bag has been playing with an edge and have succeeded with players who play that way...

I think this team is fine for aggression.  Green is a GREAT fit for this team, with his ability to play off the ball.

If the Oneals come back, they will have plenty of aggression.

[Chris]

More importantly though, I absolutely do not think he is a below average defender or passer.

Without going point by point, Chris, in what regard is Green anything but a below average passer?  

In his ability to see passing lanes, make the correct pass, and put it where it needs to be.  

He is by no means a playmaker.  He is not going to create off the dribble to create shots for other players.  But he always makes the correct pass, at the correct time, and has very good vision.  And that has always been the case going back to college, when the princeton offense was run through him.  

I am curious why you think he is a poor passer?  Just because he doesn't get a lot of assists?  Because assists are not necessarily reflective of good or bad passers.

[Roy H.]

More importantly though, I absolutely do not think he is a below average defender or passer.

Without going point by point, Chris, in what regard is Green anything but a below average passer?  

In his ability to see passing lanes, make the correct pass, and put it where it needs to be.  

He is by no means a playmaker.  He is not going to create off the dribble to create shots for other players.  But he always makes the correct pass, at the correct time, and has very good vision.  And that has always been the case going back to college, when the princeton offense was run through him.  

I am curious why you think he is a poor passer?  Just because he doesn't get a lot of assists?  Because assists are not necessarily reflective of good or bad passers.

Yes, exactly.  If Green was a good passer, I would imagine he'd rank somewhere higher than near the bottom of the league in assists for small forwards.

[Fan from VT]

More importantly though, I absolutely do not think he is a below average defender or passer.

Without going point by point, Chris, in what regard is Green anything but a below average passer?  

In his ability to see passing lanes, make the correct pass, and put it where it needs to be.  

He is by no means a playmaker.  He is not going to create off the dribble to create shots for other players.  But he always makes the correct pass, at the correct time, and has very good vision.  And that has always been the case going back to college, when the princeton offense was run through him.  

I am curious why you think he is a poor passer?  Just because he doesn't get a lot of assists?  Because assists are not necessarily reflective of good or bad passers.

I firmly think that if you have to dig that deeply to explain why someone is a good passer, they are probably average. Most NBA players can pass the ball within the offense to a playmaker. Above average passers do wrack up assists. Not every good pass leads to an assist, but if you are making good passes all the time, you inevitably get a few assists. Green does not. He's adequate at passing.

[Chris]

More importantly though, I absolutely do not think he is a below average defender or passer.

Without going point by point, Chris, in what regard is Green anything but a below average passer?  

In his ability to see passing lanes, make the correct pass, and put it where it needs to be.  

He is by no means a playmaker.  He is not going to create off the dribble to create shots for other players.  But he always makes the correct pass, at the correct time, and has very good vision.  And that has always been the case going back to college, when the princeton offense was run through him.  

I am curious why you think he is a poor passer?  Just because he doesn't get a lot of assists?  Because assists are not necessarily reflective of good or bad passers.

Yes, exactly.  If Green was a good passer, I would imagine he'd rank somewhere higher than near the bottom of the league in assists for small forwards.

Well, you know how I hate stats.  And my eyes tell me that Green is a very good passer, in the same way Delonte West is.  They don't put up the assist stats because they don't have the playmaking skills of other players at their positions (plus, for Green, he just has not been asked to do that).  But a guy who knows when to, and how to swing the ball, make the entry pass, or even make an outlet is invaluable.  It may not lead directly to baskets, but that doesn't change the fact that they are good passers.

Out of curiosity, do you think Deng is a good passer?  Because I also think he is an excellent passer, despite the fact that the numbers don't make it look that way.

[Kuberski33]

Back to the original question....I think Marquis injury was the turning point of this season.  If it doesn't happen, Perk is still here and this team has an excellent chance of going all the way.  They would not have won it all going into the playoffs with the team they had right before the trade - no cover for Pierce and their bench was TERRIBLE in the weeks prior to the trade.

To date the trade has not worked out.  You can't turn over the much of any roster - with no training camp and few practices - and expect any cohesion.

But either way, the Celtics were screwed. 

Danny still may have made the right move even if it doesn't look that way today.  I think it was going to be very difficult to re-sign Perk and keep BBD - then you would be left with 5 starters, 3 of which are aging and a huge hole in the your end of game unit with no Baby.  And on top of that, having to rebuild the rest of the roster with limited resources.

[go11celtics]

Back to the original question....I think Marquis injury was the turning point of this season.  If it doesn't happen, Perk is still here and this team has an excellent chance of going all the way.  They would not have won it all going into the playoffs with the team they had right before the trade - no cover for Pierce and their bench was TERRIBLE in the weeks prior to the trade.

To date the trade has not worked out.  You can't turn over the much of any roster - with no training camp and few practices - and expect any cohesion.

But either way, the Celtics were screwed. 

Danny still may have made the right move even if it doesn't look that way today.  I think it was going to be very difficult to re-sign Perk and keep BBD - then you would be left with 5 starters, 3 of which are aging and a huge hole in the your end of game unit with no Baby.  And on top of that, having to rebuild the rest of the roster with limited resources.

who would have thought that our season depended so deeply on daniels lol.

[JohnBagleyValueMeal]

Back to the original question....I think Marquis injury was the turning point of this season.  If it doesn't happen, Perk is still here and this team has an excellent chance of going all the way.  They would not have won it all going into the playoffs with the team they had right before the trade - no cover for Pierce and their bench was TERRIBLE in the weeks prior to the trade.

To date the trade has not worked out.  You can't turn over the much of any roster - with no training camp and few practices - and expect any cohesion.

But either way, the Celtics were screwed. 

Danny still may have made the right move even if it doesn't look that way today.  I think it was going to be very difficult to re-sign Perk and keep BBD - then you would be left with 5 starters, 3 of which are aging and a huge hole in the your end of game unit with no Baby.  And on top of that, having to rebuild the rest of the roster with limited resources.

I keep going back to losing out on Tony Allen then throwing the full MLE at Jermaine O'Neal. Losing Quis wouldn't be such a catastrophe if Tony could pick up the slack. And losing Shaq for extended time wouldn't murder our interior defense so badly if we had a center who would actually play for more than 10% of the season. That MLE could have come in handy, but it's totally wasted on JO.

[Kuberski33]

I keep going back to losing out on Tony Allen then throwing the full MLE at Jermaine O'Neal. Losing Quis wouldn't be such a catastrophe if Tony could pick up the slack. And losing Shaq for extended time wouldn't murder our interior defense so badly if we had a center who would actually play for more than 10% of the season. That MLE could have come in handy, but it's totally wasted on JO.

If JO's bone-on-bone knee can somehow hold up for 2 months, he was actually playing decent before he was laid up.  Humongous 'if' I know....

[Bird Man]

Daniels has a long history of getting injured.  The Celtics were asking for injury troubles when they signed Daniels and West too.  Both have been very injury prone throughout their careers.  If you sign the wrong players, you get the troubles they're experiencing right now.