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

[dlpin]

those who defend the trade keep talking about how it made sense - that the exchange of talent was in favor of the Celtics because Jeff Green supposedly has more pure talent than Perk. maybe, he does.

but that's all on paper.

what was wrong with the trade at the time and what's still wrong with the trade was that it hurt the Celtics on the court, where the game is actually played. the main damage was the loss of Perk, who was an integral part of this team and this Celtics team's sum is greater than its individual parts, which are impressive enough by themselves. Perk fit this team both in playing style and in terms of the group chemistry, which is as important as pure talent. the Celtics simply have not been the same team since he was traded - it's obvious.

what was also wrong with the trade was that Danny traded for players who do not fit the Celtics playing style or team personality. both guys are offense first and both guys are soft, finesse players. that's why they fit in OKC and why they don't fit in Boston. we already know that team chemistry + toughness beats talented finesse every time - see 1984 & 2008 NBA Finals.


Danny screwed up in a major way - maybe the worst Boston sports disaster since Buckner's error.

The slump started before the trade. And the slump is explained by injuries and an old team wearing down.

[LilRip]

if Jeff Green blossoms in the playoffs, then the trade would look very, very good. i support the trade, and i don't think we have "hindsight" just yet.

i loved Perk on our team, but i felt like he had already more or less reached his ceiling. His rebounding may improve in the future, but that's probably it. he's worked his tail off to become an elite post defender though.

[Tai]

those who defend the trade keep talking about how it made sense - that the exchange of talent was in favor of the Celtics because Jeff Green supposedly has more pure talent than Perk. maybe, he does.

but that's all on paper.

what was wrong with the trade at the time and what's still wrong with the trade was that it hurt the Celtics on the court, where the game is actually played. the main damage was the loss of Perk, who was an integral part of this team and this Celtics team's sum is greater than its individual parts, which are impressive enough by themselves. Perk fit this team both in playing style and in terms of the group chemistry, which is as important as pure talent. the Celtics simply have not been the same team since he was traded - it's obvious.

what was also wrong with the trade was that Danny traded for players who do not fit the Celtics playing style or team personality. both guys are offense first and both guys are soft, finesse players. that's why they fit in OKC and why they don't fit in Boston. we already know that team chemistry + toughness beats talented finesse every time - see 1984 & 2008 NBA Finals.


Danny screwed up in a major way - maybe the worst Boston sports disaster since Buckner's error.

I didn't know the Celtics were swept in the playoffs already. 

Last sentence is definitely an exaggeration.