With the benefit of hindsight, do you think Danny regrets the Perk trade?

[fairweatherfan]

Welcome to the world of the "true fans", where any sign of dissent is shouted down by calling others "foolish" and stereotyping them.

I don't really want to get involved in debating any agenda behind the thread, but you realize this is a pretty strong stereotype itself, right?

[Roy H.]

Welcome to the world of the "true fans", where any sign of dissent is shouted down by calling others "foolish" and stereotyping them.

I don't really want to get involved in debating any agenda behind the thread, but you realize this is a pretty strong stereotype itself, right?

Is it a stereotype, when the statement is addressed to the people making those arguments? 

[elcotte]

Danny got good "on paper" value for Perk, but my guess is that he'd undo the trade if he could.  I think he over-estimated Shaq's ability to return at a high level, and I think he expected more from Green than he's gotten.

The trade could still look good in the future, but when you're a contender, "the future is now", as they say.  I think Danny would prefer the greater certainty of having Perk versus praying for the health of Shaq, JO, and Krstic.  I think Danny would have preferred to find a competent backup 3 via trade, while maintaining strong depth up front.

Sorry, but forget the "on paper value"....He did the trade because he felt this would be a better team after. The focus on Perk is a limited view of the state of the team before the trade. Pierce, Allen and KG weren't able to play enough minutes to make up for the lack of bench. They needed some young legs and they got them. Before the trade the "future is now" was not as rosy as you are making it out to be.
In short, no I doubt Danny looks back with any regrets.

[Roy H.]

Roy - my point is that from reading your posts about the trade - you hated it from the start, and you haven't yielded on that position.

Why should I yield on it at this point?  Has the play of the team and the individual players involved made the trade look better or worse for the Celtics?  My position is that things look worse right now, but if you think it looks better or the same, you're entitled to your opinion.

I think that contributes a little to the negative climate. I have seen Nenad ridiculed on here a lot - from my minds eye some of it is warranted, some not.

I think the "negative climate", to the extent that it exists, is attributable to the fact that the team has played pretty poorly lately.  I guess I'm flattered that you think I have so much influence, but I'm skeptical that that's the case.  Indeed, as influential and powerful as I apparently am, people seem to have no problem calling me "foolish" or insulting me, and you seem to have no problem agreeing with that.  I guess I'm not as influential as suggested, after all. 

Just my take - You have every reason to have an opinion on the trade, but I think that you should consider that as maybe the most recognized poster here on the blog - to take such a hard stance against The Trade can carry a lot of weight around here.

What would you have me do, though?  Should I just bite my tongue, or only post "positive" thoughts?  I'm a poster here, just like anybody else.  Again, I'm flattered that people put me up on a pedestal, but I'm just a guy with an opinion.

[Jon]

I still go back to my central argument:

1) This team won without Perkins.  If they couldn't win without him, that wouldn't have happened.

2) This team played poorly most of the regular season with him.  So it's not like he's some magic talisman that makes the team always play hard and play tough defense. 

[Onslaught]

I agree with Roy,  if he knew how it's turned out to this point and looks like it will end up then he'd do something different. Perhaps not as large a change as he made.

I don't know if our team before the trade could've won it all or not. It wasn't looking as good as in the start of the year.

I fell almost positive that we won't win it after the trade. And seeing the old man walk off the court like he did tonight, I'm sure of it.

[LB3533]

Danny would never undo the trade.

That trade quite possibly saved our season.

Even at this point in the season, we have more available bodies going into the playoffs....all because of the trade.

Even if some of those bodies aren't big bodies...we still can play Baby and Green at the 5 and 4. Now that might not be what we all prefer...but it is a heck of a lot better than playing injured Semih or Luke Harangody in the playoffs.

Despite our record, the trade itself is a win now and win in the future.

[Roy H.]

I still go back to my central argument:

1) This team won without Perkins.  If they couldn't win without him, that wouldn't have happened.

2) This team played poorly most of the regular season with him.  So it's not like he's some magic talisman that makes the team always play hard and play tough defense. 

Yeah, but when this team won without Perkins, it's because we had a healthy and contributing Shaq.  At this point, it's at least questionable whether we ever see that player again.  Thus, why I think the trade looks worse today than it did on February 24.

[GreenFaith1819]

I give up.

[jasail]

This trade does not stand on its own.  If Danny kept Perk the C's would have more size, but would have Von Wafer and Sasha Pavolvic playing more minutes than they should.  

We are not a championship team with Wafer playing serious minutes.  Green gave them that option off the bench and gives them someone that can give Doc time on the wing and at the PF position.  He can pick up 15-20 minutes and give rest to KG, Paul and Ray.  They needed a player like that.  

At the same time the C's need size inside.  And they aren't winning w/o a healthy Shaq and a healthy JO.  The issue here is that they had Shaq and JO, but they didn't have the wing.  He made a calculated decision and while it doesn't look good it doesn't mean they still don't have a chance.  But they had NO chance if he didn't pull the trigger.  

Unless he turned down a trade for something less than Perk for something similar to Green, then I don't think Danny can regret it.  

[Jon]

I still go back to my central argument:

1) This team won without Perkins.  If they couldn't win without him, that wouldn't have happened.

2) This team played poorly most of the regular season with him.  So it's not like he's some magic talisman that makes the team always play hard and play tough defense. 

Yeah, but when this team won without Perkins, it's because we had a healthy and contributing Shaq.  At this point, it's at least questionable whether we ever see that player again.  Thus, why I think the trade looks worse today than it did on February 24.

Well, they're calling it a minor strain right now.  I wouldn't rule out Shaq yet.  

I also wouldn't sleep on JO.  He looks structurally sound.  he just needs to get his legs underneath him and the plays down.  

[Kane3387]

I'll admit the trade hasn't worked out the way I anticipated, but no I do not think Danny regrets the deal unless there was another option that allowed us to keep Perk.

Still I don't think he regrets the trade as of today because the season isn't over yet. The playoffs haven't even started and we are still eligible to win a title. There was definitely a lot more doom and gloom last year and look what happened. I am not saying to expect a similar result but too many variables are out there to regret anything.

Perk has helped OKC but he plays less then 30 mpg. The inclusion of James Harden into the starting lineup Serge Ibaka not having to play center, and Nazcr Mohammad have made a big difference too.

Also the Celtics, besides Houston, haven't been blown out. They have lost some close games and a lot of that was due to Rondo's inconsistency, no one blocks out, and the fact Ray Allen is getting terrible screens.

Our competition is not that scary. Green is better to have against Miami and arguably Chicago. The Lakers look fierce but they aren't scoring a lot and Bynum tweaked his knee again missing the entire fourth qtr and resulting in a loss to Denver today (the Martin putback). If Bynum is not 100% then SA can beat them. Heck Memphis can beat them. If La doesn't make it out of the west then we are superior to every other team from that conference.

DA did what he had to do. Perk was out for three weeks. Semih was hurt. Nate needed surgery. Quise was don for the year. Delonte was out. Wafer was out. Both the Oneals were out. We would have had to play six guys for like a week and maybe more. The big 4 would be dead by now.

Also we have a potential lottery pick now and too many other things can happen like injuries to other players on contending teams, such as Perk.

[Onslaught]

Do you think heads will roll if Boston gets knocked out really soon and OKC has a really great playoff run and Perk plays his tail off?

I'm not a fan of the trade. And even then I don't think Danny should get sacked. But do you think something could happen?

[jdz101]

Kendrick Perkins isnt a gamechanger.

Shaq is.

I'd rather gamble on shaq than rely on perk.

[Roy H.]

Do you think heads will roll if Boston gets knocked out really soon and OKC has a really great playoff run and Perk plays hit tail off?

I'm not a fan of the trade. And even then I don't think Danny should get sacked. But do you think something could happen?

I think Danny is safe for the foreseeable future.  I do think Doc could step down if we lose early, while I don't think he would if we won a title.