I wonder what Bill Russell's thoughts are on the trade

[Mike]

Or what Red Auerbach's would have thought.  I'm reading Russell's 1979 auto-biography that was co-written by Taylor Branch titled "Second Wind," and I came across a rather disheartening passage, in relation to this year's team:

I've always thought that the main source of Celtics "togetherness" was that we were literally together for so long. During my thirteen-year career the Celtics made a grand total of one trade: Mel Counts for Bailey Howell. That's all. From time to time Red would pick up an old-timer like Wayne Embry or Willie Naulls, and squeeze another year or two out of him... We all knew that the game was a business and that we could be traded tomorrow, but Red did a good job of making us believe that we would stay as long as we contributed to winning, and this made us feel secure.

The team's stability was also sound strategy on Red's part. He believed that you don't tamper with a championship team; as much as possible, you keep the combination intact as long as you can. This may seem obvious - the only way to proceed - but many franchises have broken up championship teams in violation of Red's rule. The Golden State Warriors, for instance, traded a key player in the off-season within weeks after winning the 1975 NBA championship, and the team soon lost whatever had held it together.

I've been telling myself (and others) that this was a good move, it'll show in the playoffs, Shaq is the key, we did fine early in the season without Perk, etc. However, it's hard to argue with Russell and Red!

I'm the ultimate optimist when it comes to the Celtics, so I'm not ready to claim before the playoffs even begin that the Celtics have "lost whatever had held it together," but when I read that passage it sure made me feel uneasy.

[GreenFaith1819]

Well, for me, I hated the trade at the time and I do miss Perk, but as I've stated before on here I welcome Nenad and Jeff Green and look forward to what they can help us with.

Perk is gone...he is in OKC right now. This team of ours (Boston) still has Championship Aspirations. Doc has been candid recently with us and the media - especially with his comments on yesterday regarding the team.

I do know that in looking back at the trade, this may help others to cope. Well, for me, whenever I see a Perk thread, especially here lately, I cringe.

I think that sometimes here on this blog, we crucify our players. Jeff and Nenad did not ask to be traded, no did Perk. But amiss the tears and the separation from their friends and teammates, each player involved did in fact report to their new teams - ready to help them compete.

I read that Dave Aldridge article yesterday - with the excerpt in it from Rajon Rondo. His immature thoughts were basically that if we didn't win it this year - it would be on the "new" guys.

Thanks, Leader - way to take the pressure off of your new teammates.

But back to the article here - thanks for posting, Mike. The wisdom and knowledge of Bill Russell will always be respected in this household and I'm sure many others - but in the real world I suppose that Danny did not or does not consider it.

And to me, he has that right - whether we agree to it or not. Whatever happens between now and June because of The Trade, I still have the utmost respect for Danny - because he made this move with the only intention of trying to make the team better. He did not intend on destroying it - nor has he. That's not him. I still believe that this year's Boston Celtics Team can still win Banner 18 - but God forbid they don't - I thank God, Danny, Doc, Thibs and the players for a Great Run the last 4-5 years.

I am sure this won't be the last thread about The Trade - and I respect and accept that. But for me, The Trade is done. I see why Danny did it, and what the factors were that made him do it.

I wonder if Bill Russell's teams had to contend with injuries as much as Doc's teams have?

For me, it is time to look forward - while certainly not forgetting the past.

[Roy H.]

Very interesting quote.

If I had to guess, I'm sure Danny would point to examples in the 80s, where Red traded Henderson, Max, and Danny as counterexamples.  He'd also point out that free agency wasn't a factor in the 50s and 60s, so it was easier to keep guys together.  However, I fall on the Russell side of things:  when you have a core that is working, you should get as much out of them as you can.

[ram]

Red, too, use to say, "Don't break up a championship team."

He did it after 1976 and regretted it. He let Paul Silas go and brought in cancers Wicks and Rowe. Cowens quit for a while and the team was never the same (although it made the 7th game of the ECF).

Max was done when he traded him for Walton and Walton was a special player with a winner's mentality so that one worked out.

Trading Henderson was a mistake, IMO, even if Bias had lived. It probably cost them 1985 championship as the ex-Knick guard never fit in.

My first thought after I heard about Perk was Silas 1977 and Henderson 1985. We can argue the merits of all players involved but the bottom line, to me, is leave well enough alone.

[BballTim]

Very interesting quote.

If I had to guess, I'm sure Danny would point to examples in the 80s, where Red traded Henderson, Max, and Danny as counterexamples.  He'd also point out that free agency wasn't a factor in the 50s and 60s, so it was easier to keep guys together.  However, I fall on the Russell side of things:  when you have a core that is working, you should get as much out of them as you can.

  He might also point out we haven't won the title in two years.

[Reyquila]

Everybody is an expert at the guessing game.You can never be proven wrong.

[Bouncing Buckeye]

'My first thought after I heard about Perk was Silas 1977 and Henderson 1985. We can argue the merits of all players involved but the bottom line, to me, is leave well enough alone.'

I thought of those too.  You could also add Don Chaney.  The Silas deal was purely over money but the Celts had been very lucky to win the year before -- I can't believe they could've beaten the Blazers in '77, even with Silas.  That said, the deal did end up affecting the team psyche as the Perk trade seems to have done to this tem.

The Henderson trade was done partly to free up room for Danny Ainge to develop.  Unfortunately Red couldn't find a reliable backup for Ainge --  Ray Williams was OK till the finals when his loose ballhandling was exposed. We might have won in '85 with Henderson still around, but we might not have been a juggernaut in '86 when Danny Ainge really came into his own.  And if Bias had lived and lived up to expectations, that trade would have been more than justified.

I think this trade hurts about the same as the Henderson trade did in '85 (he was btw my favorite player).  If the Celts go down I'm not sure the trade will be the difference-maker.  With Perk and some sub-optimal replacement for Marquis we would've had an outside shot at the title, but no more than that.  Now we have a little less than an outside shot -- we need a lot of luck.

[ram]

I forgot about Chaney. I never thought Charlie Scott really fit in, despite the ring in 1976. I wonder if they would have been better sticking with Westphal.

Gerald Henderson was one of my all time favorites, too.

[mgent]

Does anyone really think Russell would rather be watching Krstic than Perk?

[GranTur]

How can there be so much back and forth on this trade?

1. If we didn't make it we'd have no backup for Paul Pierce
2. We upgraded our third string PG from Nate to Carlos Arroyo...
3. We have KG, Shaq, JO, Baby, Krstic, and Murphy...Kendrick does not make a big difference here...
4. Our problem is generally OFFENSE not DEFENSE...Perkins is a very poor offensive center.

There's no question Perkins is a top 5 NBA low post defender, but we have tons of defensive tenacity on this team...it's offensive flow and a backup for Paul Pierce that we needed the most this trade deadline.

[Roy H.]

How can there be so much back and forth on this trade?

1. If we didn't make it we'd have no backup for Paul Pierce

That's only assuming that there were no other trades out there.  Since we were rumored to be involved in multiple discussions, including one 3-way deal with Golden State that was agreed upon, I don't think anybody can say that we couldn't have gotten a backup.

2. We upgraded our third string PG from Nate to Carlos Arroyo...

I don't really see this as an upgrade, although it's largely moot with Nate being injured.  Neither would have played much in the playoffs, assuming Delonte is healthy.

3. We have KG, Shaq, JO, Baby, Krstic, and Murphy...Kendrick does not make a big difference here...

Agree to disagree, I guess.  Perk is the best defender and is the guy most familiar with our offense and defense.  Also, Shaq has played 6 minutes since February.

4. Our problem is generally OFFENSE not DEFENSE...Perkins is a very poor offensive center.

Very poor?  He scored as much per minute as "offensive center" Krstic did last year, and shot a much higher percentage.  Perk knows our plays, knows where to be on the court, and knows how to set screens.  For a fifth option, he was a very efficient scorer.  Teams need those low usage types of players.

[stylo617617]

i mean how do u go against russel? i wouldnt dare lol but we were dominate with shaq in the lineup

ainge has said things like "shaq's better then he was in fall" & that he has every bit of confidence shaq will be fine

but i dont think he does it knowing what he knows now why? cuz shaq hasnt been healthy

but if shaq was healthy i probably wouldve done it knowing h was
i think's shaq's lack of health is the main reason guys hate it so much & thats reasonable but if shaq's there come playoff time through out the whole ride numbers dont lie were a better team than we were before the trade

all that phycoligical (i kno i spelled it wrong) stuff that kobe,noah,rose etc been saying its cause they havent faced us with shaq there all of them havent beat us with shaq in the line up even LA

so until they see the gearth of shaq clogging the middle they'll think watever they want its when they have to play us in the playoffs with shaq that matters

so thats the gamble danny's taken the big IF/shamrock

24-24 mins for j.o & shaq & i cant see a team beating us 4 times

go celtics!!!!!!

Cetics vs Thunder is my finals prediction with celtics winning in 6 lets do this !!! we going all the way this time

[PosImpos]

It's questionable to say that this was still really the same "championship squad" a couple years removed from an actual championship and without any of the same bench contributors still on the team.

If we were to hold with the rationale in the quote, then Danny would never have let Posey, Powe, House, TA, or Scal go.

[dlpin]

Isn't it ironic to note that the one championship this group of players has came when almost every player was new to the team?

[PosImpos]

Isn't it ironic to note that the one championship this group of players has came when almost every player was new to the team?

well played sir.