The best player in "the trade"

[Chris]

We know that Sam Presti thought Perk was the best player in the deal, since he gave up two starters and a draft pick for him.

You keep using this as evidence, when it's far from it. It ignores team needs, future plans, salary cap situation, current roster construction, players in the roster, etc., etc.

Yeah.  I think the trade proves that Perkins was the most valuable player in the deal.  And it also shows that OKC really felt they needed Perkins.  But I don't think it proves Presti thinks Perk is the "better" player. 

Honestly though, I hate this argument anyways, because when you are talking about championship contenders, its not about the better player, it is about fit, and need. 

[kgiessler]

Green is a decent quality player that can run the floor and can score the ball, plus he's a walking matchup issue.

Perk is a slow big dude coming off an ACL and can't score the ball, struggles to run the floor, BUT apparently according to bloggers here, has amazing force powers that create instant chemistry everywhere he goes. I'm unconvinced. I believe more in men getting the ball in the hoop, and stopping the other team getting the ball in the hoop.

JO after months of layoff dropped in out of nowhere and contributed a similar presence to perk on d, plus he can get the ball in the hoop. Let's get real here.

You do recognize the only reason the Celtics were able to win last night was because of proximity.  I don't think it's been mentioned yet here on the board; I'm surprised.  Does everyone think its just coincidence that they win in San Antonio, which just so happens to be the 2nd closest NBA city to Oklahoma City?  I think not.  

After all, its this proximity that allowed the team to succeed so much with Perk on the bench for the season; that has been mentioned by bloggers here though.  

[fairweatherfan]

We know that Sam Presti thought Perk was the best player in the deal, since he gave up two starters and a draft pick for him.

You keep using this as evidence, when it's far from it. It ignores team needs, future plans, salary cap situation, current roster construction, players in the roster, player fit, etc., etc. It ignores other deals that Ainge might have had in place for Perk, hence driving the price up.

I agree, perceived player value will differ from team to team based on their current strengths and needs.  You could just as easily say Presti gave up two redundant players who he wasn't going to sign this offseason, and (maybe) a low lottery pick for several years of a player that addresses the team's single biggest weakness.

Plus, it seems to be implying that OKC giving up a lot in the deal is evidence that they got the better of it, which is a novel way of assessing a trade.

[bbd24]

Hands down Green is the best player in the deal. Unless Ainge uses that future Clipper pick and drafts/trades for an impact player far superior to JG.. Which could easily happen knowing Ainge.

The best player in the deal can't be King Perk when he's only bringing 0 points, 10 rebounds, 5 fouls, and 'toughness'. If you want that or something better, you bring in guys like the O'neals. That way you don't have to payout 9 M per.

Smart man Danny, smart man.

[Roy H.]

Plus, it seems to be implying that OKC giving up a lot in the deal is evidence that they got the better of it, which is a novel way of assessing a trade.

How is that the implication?  I said that Presti thought that Perk was worth at least as much as he gave up, and thus, better than any of the individual pieces.  I didn't use Presti's opinion as proof that he won the trade, but rather that he valued Perk as the best player in the deal.

[BballTim]

Plus, it seems to be implying that OKC giving up a lot in the deal is evidence that they got the better of it, which is a novel way of assessing a trade.

How is that the implication?  I said that Presti thought that Perk was worth at least as much as he gave up, and thus, better than any of the individual pieces.  I didn't use Presti's opinion as proof that he won the trade, but rather that he valued Perk as the best player in the deal.

  Regardless of which player is better Presti made the deal based on who was more valuable to his team, not more valuable in a vacuum. Assembling a roster isn't necessarily about collecting the best players but collecting the players that fit together best.

[Marcus13]

Meh perks been average at best.

Somebody hasn't been watching

[kgiessler]

Plus, it seems to be implying that OKC giving up a lot in the deal is evidence that they got the better of it, which is a novel way of assessing a trade.

How is that the implication?  I said that Presti thought that Perk was worth at least as much as he gave up, and thus, better than any of the individual pieces.  I didn't use Presti's opinion as proof that he won the trade, but rather that he valued Perk as the best player in the deal.

So you don't think OKC got the 'better' of the trade?  From what I've read here, it always seemed like you did.

[bbd24]

Meh perks been average at best.

Somebody hasn't been watching

Tough to watch someone in street clothes all year

[Roy H.]

Plus, it seems to be implying that OKC giving up a lot in the deal is evidence that they got the better of it, which is a novel way of assessing a trade.

How is that the implication?  I said that Presti thought that Perk was worth at least as much as he gave up, and thus, better than any of the individual pieces.  I didn't use Presti's opinion as proof that he won the trade, but rather that he valued Perk as the best player in the deal.

So you don't think OKC got the best of the trade?

Wow.  Two posts in a row that put words in my mouth.  Come on, guys, you're all better than this.  Read what people actually say, rather than looking between the lines for implied meaning.  I'm sorry to sound like a drama queen, but this has happened consistently around here lately, and it's getting old.  You guys are all really good posters who I respect, which I guess is why I'm taken aback by people ascribing meaning to me that I never expressed.

Yes, I think OKC got the better of the trade.  However, my previous post had nothing to do with that stance; it was talking about Presti's individual evaluation of the worth of the individual players involved.

[Moranis]

At this point, I'm sure most of us have said our piece on the subject.

We know that Sam Presti thought Perk was the best player in the deal, since he gave up two starters and a draft pick for him.  Most NBA analysts seem to agree.  Here on the blog, things are more split.

I just hope that the team starts to play well and the JO and Shaq step up, so that Perk can gain Big Al status:  a player most of us still pull for and have fond memories of, but who doesn't necessarily hold us back in our quest to win.

I don't necessarily believe Presti thought he was the best player in the trade as much as he thought he was the best player for what his team was lacking.  There is a very large difference.  The Thunder needed an interior player that didn't want to score.  They didn't need a long athletic wing as the third option on offense.  The opposite was true of the Celtics and hence the trade. 

[libermaniac]

Best player in the trade?  With the 11th pick in the 2012 NBA draft, the Boston Celtics select LeBryan Nash, SF from Lincoln HS in Dallas Texas.  Come on ... with a name like that, he's a combination of LeBron, Kobe and Nash .... he'll dominate! 

http://www.nbadraft.net/players/lebryan-nash

On a serious note ... don't forget about this asset we got in the trade ... when all is said and done, this trade COULD be a huge steal for the C's and the bridge to their next championship run team.  Only time will tell.

[moiso]

Hands down Green is the best player in the deal. Unless Ainge uses that future Clipper pick and drafts/trades for an impact player far superior to JG.. Which could easily happen knowing Ainge.

The best player in the deal can't be King Perk when he's only bringing 0 points, 10 rebounds, 5 fouls, and 'toughness'. If you want that or something better, you bring in guys like the O'neals. That way you don't have to payout 9 M per.

Smart man Danny, smart man.

Perk's lack of offense is comparable to Green's lack of toughness and defense.

[CelticG1]

Hands down Green is the best player in the deal. Unless Ainge uses that future Clipper pick and drafts/trades for an impact player far superior to JG.. Which could easily happen knowing Ainge.

The best player in the deal can't be King Perk when he's only bringing 0 points, 10 rebounds, 5 fouls, and 'toughness'. If you want that or something better, you bring in guys like the O'neals. That way you don't have to payout 9 M per.

Smart man Danny, smart man.

Perk's lack of offense is comparable to Green's lack of toughness and defense.

I think Green is definitely a better defender and is more versatile defender than Perk is as an offensive player.

As for toughness I don't really see how Green isn't tough. Would you call him a soft player? He seems like he bangs pretty hard in the post and has guarded (albeit below average) a lot bigger PF compared to him. What about him doesn't make him tough?

[CelticG1]

Meh perks been average at best.

Somebody hasn't been watching

6 points 7.7 rebounds 1 block in 24 minutes. About what you would expect from Perk. But that doesn't reflect his "toughness"