Author Topic: Dan Shaughnessy article on the "trade"  (Read 20866 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Dan Shaughnessy article on the "trade"
« Reply #45 on: April 13, 2011, 06:52:06 PM »

Offline vinnie

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8654
  • Tommy Points: 429
This team was as good or better than any team we've had since the big three got here, all without Perkins. If Shaq comes back and gives us 15-20 minutes a night, the whole mojo of the team will change, almost instantaneously. You will see the return of swag in Boston and we'll have as good a shot as anyone to hang #18.

But for me, the reason why this trade was successsful and a good one, is what it does for us moving forward.

Rondo and Green are a very nice young duo. Green is not an all star and I'm not sure he ever will be. However, as your 3rd or 4th option and as a multi-talented utility guy, he's perfect.

You add in another max free agent at the right spot, the Clipper's pick, our picks, a mid level guy - not to mention other young complimentary pieces you might be able to add by trading the contracts of KG, Ray Allen and Big baby next year? You could be rebuilt within 1-2 years and Rondo is 26...

Look at the competition moving forward guys - OKC, Denver Miami, Chicago, NY - it's athleticism and speed. With this trade Ainge started building the high octane team he envisions around Rondo that will compete with the new kids on the block. And we think it was a bad move?

Another question - how well will Perkins fit into a run and gun team? He's already got 8 years on some bad wheels and he's not a run-jump athlete to boot. You think he's going to hold up another 10 years?

You can bring in a Dalembert or someone similar at center and spend your money on talent in the other positions.

It's a gamble, but if Shaq can give us 15-20 a night, Jermaine stays healthy - I think we're hanging #18 this year.

Do we really think the window for KG and Ray goes beyond next year anyway??? At some point you have to get on with it, as much as I love this current team, we have to get on with it - the rebuilding that is.

Ainge balanced it perfectly - we still have "just as good a shot to win it this year - and we got a key piece next to Rondo moving forward.

What the players need to do is grab their sack, show their teeth, be willing to get bloody...and go get #18. They need to stop with the pouting, or the apathetic BS, and go get dirty. This team can certainly win it.

Lastly - are giving any thought to the possiblity that now having played nearly 20 games together -some of the problems of assimilating may receed gradually and these guys could slowly become cohesive as they move through the playoffs?

Keep the faith. Now is the time to get dirty - and this group is a dirty bunch. They won't be that easy to knock out - they all have hearts of champions, even their apathetic BS of late won't prevent those hearts from shining when the chips are truly down when the ball goes up for the playoffs.   

   

In hypothetical terms, let's say we just miss a title this year, and it could be proven that it's the trade that made the difference.  Let's also say that Jeff Green and the Clippers pick both flourish in Boston, but never win a title here.

Under those circumstances, would you consider the trade a success?

I don't know if 'success' is the right term given with that situation, but I would consider it still the 'right' move.   We have no business paying a player of Perks caliber 9 Million per.  Not with the core 4 around him.  3-5 M, sure.  9 ? hells bells no.  You don't pay players who give you 5 fouls, 5 pts, Rebounding, and good defense 9 M per.  You unload those types of players and get something for him now, instead of waiting for him to walk on you next year.   He's not worth the open market money.  Not with the roster stacked as is.

Your anchor is KG on defense, and thats why your still allowing only 91 pts per game , best in the league, all without King Perk.  You've proven you can add guys like Shaq and Jermaine O'neal to the core 4 and not miss a beat. Heck, you might be even better with any of those two playing with the core 4. Why pay Perkins when you don't have to ?  Get something for him now, which you did and then some.  Green's a starter and only 24, Krstic is a solid backup center, and the 1st round clipper pick is a great future piece.

Definitely the right move.

Those guys in OKC must be morons then for giving Perk the extension they signed him to.

Re: Dan Shaughnessy article on the "trade"
« Reply #46 on: April 13, 2011, 06:59:32 PM »

Offline ballin

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 651
  • Tommy Points: 105
All I've got to say is that if we pay Green anything within 2 mil. per year of what Perkins extended for in OKC I'm going to cry myself to sleep.

Re: Dan Shaughnessy article on the "trade"
« Reply #47 on: April 13, 2011, 07:16:00 PM »

Offline bbd24

  • NCE
  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1362
  • Tommy Points: 118
This team was as good or better than any team we've had since the big three got here, all without Perkins. If Shaq comes back and gives us 15-20 minutes a night, the whole mojo of the team will change, almost instantaneously. You will see the return of swag in Boston and we'll have as good a shot as anyone to hang #18.

But for me, the reason why this trade was successsful and a good one, is what it does for us moving forward.

Rondo and Green are a very nice young duo. Green is not an all star and I'm not sure he ever will be. However, as your 3rd or 4th option and as a multi-talented utility guy, he's perfect.

You add in another max free agent at the right spot, the Clipper's pick, our picks, a mid level guy - not to mention other young complimentary pieces you might be able to add by trading the contracts of KG, Ray Allen and Big baby next year? You could be rebuilt within 1-2 years and Rondo is 26...

Look at the competition moving forward guys - OKC, Denver Miami, Chicago, NY - it's athleticism and speed. With this trade Ainge started building the high octane team he envisions around Rondo that will compete with the new kids on the block. And we think it was a bad move?

Another question - how well will Perkins fit into a run and gun team? He's already got 8 years on some bad wheels and he's not a run-jump athlete to boot. You think he's going to hold up another 10 years?

You can bring in a Dalembert or someone similar at center and spend your money on talent in the other positions.

It's a gamble, but if Shaq can give us 15-20 a night, Jermaine stays healthy - I think we're hanging #18 this year.

Do we really think the window for KG and Ray goes beyond next year anyway??? At some point you have to get on with it, as much as I love this current team, we have to get on with it - the rebuilding that is.

Ainge balanced it perfectly - we still have "just as good a shot to win it this year - and we got a key piece next to Rondo moving forward.

What the players need to do is grab their sack, show their teeth, be willing to get bloody...and go get #18. They need to stop with the pouting, or the apathetic BS, and go get dirty. This team can certainly win it.

Lastly - are giving any thought to the possiblity that now having played nearly 20 games together -some of the problems of assimilating may receed gradually and these guys could slowly become cohesive as they move through the playoffs?

Keep the faith. Now is the time to get dirty - and this group is a dirty bunch. They won't be that easy to knock out - they all have hearts of champions, even their apathetic BS of late won't prevent those hearts from shining when the chips are truly down when the ball goes up for the playoffs.   

   

In hypothetical terms, let's say we just miss a title this year, and it could be proven that it's the trade that made the difference.  Let's also say that Jeff Green and the Clippers pick both flourish in Boston, but never win a title here.

Under those circumstances, would you consider the trade a success?

I don't know if 'success' is the right term given with that situation, but I would consider it still the 'right' move.   We have no business paying a player of Perks caliber 9 Million per.  Not with the core 4 around him.  3-5 M, sure.  9 ? hells bells no.  You don't pay players who give you 5 fouls, 5 pts, Rebounding, and good defense 9 M per.  You unload those types of players and get something for him now, instead of waiting for him to walk on you next year.   He's not worth the open market money.  Not with the roster stacked as is.

Your anchor is KG on defense, and thats why your still allowing only 91 pts per game , best in the league, all without King Perk.  You've proven you can add guys like Shaq and Jermaine O'neal to the core 4 and not miss a beat. Heck, you might be even better with any of those two playing with the core 4. Why pay Perkins when you don't have to ?  Get something for him now, which you did and then some.  Green's a starter and only 24, Krstic is a solid backup center, and the 1st round clipper pick is a great future piece.

Definitely the right move.

Those guys in OKC must be morons then for giving Perk the extension they signed him to.

All depends on the makeup of the team. You have a core 4 of Rondo, Ray, Pierce, and KG.  Your defensive anchor is KG, not Perkins. The rest are solid defensively despite Rondo's lack of staying in front of his man at this point.

You can put a guy next to KG and make him a player all day.  When you've built a stacked roster like Ainge has, you have room to move.  Whether its free agents like Shaq, JO, or even someone out of the blue like say a Samuel Dalembert.  These types of player will add what Perkins added, if not more. As evident with Shaqs play when healthy.

Even during a injury riddled year, and without Perkins, your still holding opponents to 91 pts per, best in the league.  Thats darn solid.

So why pay Perk when you don't have to ?  Get something for him now and move on.  He's not worth what he'll get on the open market. Not to a C's team and a stacked roster. Other teams like the Thunder who have more scoring, less defense ,will pay him. You don't have to.

Its not about being moronic, its about getting something when you know you have others who anchor your team.

Re: Dan Shaughnessy article on the "trade"
« Reply #48 on: April 13, 2011, 07:29:46 PM »

Offline Yogi

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1606
  • Tommy Points: 255
I love it when a writer who everyone considers to be an ignorant idiot, suddenly comes with a column that backs your stance on something and suddenly he starts being seen as an authoritative figure on the subject.

You mean like last year when this same writer said he believed in the Celtics and thought they had a good shot at winning it all?
You know who are PROVEN authority figures.  Doc and Ainge who brought us 17 and got us a game away from 18.  At least give them more credit than some guy whose analysis consists of his "feelings" about a trade rather than Basketball. 
CelticsBlog DKC Pelicans
J. Lin/I. Canaan/N. Wolters
E. Gordon/A. Shved
N. Batum/A. Roberson
A. Davis/K. Olynyk/M. Scott
D. Cousins/A. Baynes/V. Faverani
Rights: A. Abrines, R. Neto, L. Jean-Charles  Coach: M. Williams

Re: Dan Shaughnessy article on the "trade"
« Reply #49 on: April 13, 2011, 07:36:08 PM »

Offline the_Bird

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3244
  • Tommy Points: 176
All I've got to say is that if we pay Green anything within 2 mil. per year of what Perkins extended for in OKC I'm going to cry myself to sleep.

Get some Kleenex.  Green's asking for what, 5/$50M (if the rumors are to be believed)? 

I don't get the whole sentiment toward's Perk's new deal supposedly being bad; do people even pay any attention to how much starting centers get paid?  I mean, seriously?  $8M a year for one of the better centers in the conference is an absolute bargain, IMHO.

Re: Dan Shaughnessy article on the "trade"
« Reply #50 on: April 13, 2011, 07:44:15 PM »

Offline bbd24

  • NCE
  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1362
  • Tommy Points: 118
All I've got to say is that if we pay Green anything within 2 mil. per year of what Perkins extended for in OKC I'm going to cry myself to sleep.

Get some Kleenex.  Green's asking for what, 5/$50M (if the rumors are to be believed)?  

I don't get the whole sentiment toward's Perk's new deal supposedly being bad; do people even pay any attention to how much starting centers get paid?  I mean, seriously?  $8M a year for one of the better centers in the conference is an absolute bargain, IMHO.

IMO, the better bargain is paying free agents like Shaq or Jermaine a lesser amount and not missing a beat of what Perkins brought you.

Re: Dan Shaughnessy article on the "trade"
« Reply #51 on: April 13, 2011, 09:06:15 PM »

Offline gpap

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8224
  • Tommy Points: 417
We'll see what Dan "Shirley Temple" Shaughnessy and everyone else is saying after the Celts win the title in June!

Re: Dan Shaughnessy article on the "trade"
« Reply #52 on: April 13, 2011, 09:17:50 PM »

Offline vinnie

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8654
  • Tommy Points: 429
We'll see what Dan "Shirley Temple" Shaughnessy and everyone else is saying after the Celts win the title in June!

Why are you guys so upset about what Shaughnessy wrote? Last year he was one of the few who picked the team to go to the finals? The guy gets paid to write what he thinks.

Re: Dan Shaughnessy article on the "trade"
« Reply #53 on: April 13, 2011, 09:48:41 PM »

Offline Chris

  • Global Moderator
  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18008
  • Tommy Points: 642
We'll see what Dan "Shirley Temple" Shaughnessy and everyone else is saying after the Celts win the title in June!

Why are you guys so upset about what Shaughnessy wrote? Last year he was one of the few who picked the team to go to the finals? The guy gets paid to write what he thinks.

Eh, he gets paid to write what is going to get people talking about his column.  I have a feeling he doesn't believe half of what he writes.  But, he is very good at what he does.

Re: Dan Shaughnessy article on the "trade"
« Reply #54 on: April 13, 2011, 10:47:20 PM »

Offline the_Bird

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3244
  • Tommy Points: 176
All I've got to say is that if we pay Green anything within 2 mil. per year of what Perkins extended for in OKC I'm going to cry myself to sleep.

Get some Kleenex.  Green's asking for what, 5/$50M (if the rumors are to be believed)?  

I don't get the whole sentiment toward's Perk's new deal supposedly being bad; do people even pay any attention to how much starting centers get paid?  I mean, seriously?  $8M a year for one of the better centers in the conference is an absolute bargain, IMHO.

IMO, the better bargain is paying free agents like Shaq or Jermaine a lesser amount and not missing a beat of what Perkins brought you.

JO this year's making about $6M, and he was signed to that deal with the full expectation that he was going to miss a chunk of the season (because he always does). 

Perk's going to make $8M.

I really don't understand some of you guys.  The Shaq and JO signings have worked out about as expected; we've gotten a little less than one combined season from the two of them.  That's what happens when you wager on old big men with bad wheels.  That'd be OK if they were there as depth, but you really want to be relying on guys like that?

Re: Dan Shaughnessy article on the "trade"
« Reply #55 on: April 14, 2011, 01:21:34 PM »

Offline bbd24

  • NCE
  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1362
  • Tommy Points: 118
All I've got to say is that if we pay Green anything within 2 mil. per year of what Perkins extended for in OKC I'm going to cry myself to sleep.

Get some Kleenex.  Green's asking for what, 5/$50M (if the rumors are to be believed)?  

I don't get the whole sentiment toward's Perk's new deal supposedly being bad; do people even pay any attention to how much starting centers get paid?  I mean, seriously?  $8M a year for one of the better centers in the conference is an absolute bargain, IMHO.

IMO, the better bargain is paying free agents like Shaq or Jermaine a lesser amount and not missing a beat of what Perkins brought you.

JO this year's making about $6M, and he was signed to that deal with the full expectation that he was going to miss a chunk of the season (because he always does). 

Perk's going to make $8M.

I really don't understand some of you guys.  The Shaq and JO signings have worked out about as expected; we've gotten a little less than one combined season from the two of them.  That's what happens when you wager on old big men with bad wheels.  That'd be OK if they were there as depth, but you really want to be relying on guys like that?

Jermaine O'neal and Shaq combined, 7 million.  Perks new contract, 9 million.  All of them are suspect to injury, and one just missed the offseason and half the year from an injury few have come back 100% from.  Your going to throw 9M per at that player ?

Whats there to not understand ?

Again, the better bargain is picking up guys off the streets in free agency and putting them next to KG in the middle instead of paying Perk 9 M per.

Re: Dan Shaughnessy article on the "trade"
« Reply #56 on: April 14, 2011, 02:19:06 PM »

Offline LB3533

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4088
  • Tommy Points: 315
Perk at 4-5 million per was great value.

But now you throw in more injury concerns and a bigger deal that doubles his annual salary....I dunno how you can not scratch your head and think about stuff going forward.


Re: Dan Shaughnessy article on the "trade"
« Reply #57 on: April 14, 2011, 03:45:14 PM »

Offline ballin

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 651
  • Tommy Points: 105
All I've got to say is that if we pay Green anything within 2 mil. per year of what Perkins extended for in OKC I'm going to cry myself to sleep.

Get some Kleenex.  Green's asking for what, 5/$50M (if the rumors are to be believed)?  

I don't get the whole sentiment toward's Perk's new deal supposedly being bad; do people even pay any attention to how much starting centers get paid?  I mean, seriously?  $8M a year for one of the better centers in the conference is an absolute bargain, IMHO.

IMO, the better bargain is paying free agents like Shaq or Jermaine a lesser amount and not missing a beat of what Perkins brought you.

JO this year's making about $6M, and he was signed to that deal with the full expectation that he was going to miss a chunk of the season (because he always does). 

Perk's going to make $8M.

I really don't understand some of you guys.  The Shaq and JO signings have worked out about as expected; we've gotten a little less than one combined season from the two of them.  That's what happens when you wager on old big men with bad wheels.  That'd be OK if they were there as depth, but you really want to be relying on guys like that?

Jermaine O'neal and Shaq combined, 7 million.  Perks new contract, 9 million.  All of them are suspect to injury, and one just missed the offseason and half the year from an injury few have come back 100% from.  Your going to throw 9M per at that player ?

Whats there to not understand ?

Again, the better bargain is picking up guys off the streets in free agency and putting them next to KG in the middle instead of paying Perk 9 M per.

You misunderstand why I'd be crying.

I agree that you don't want to play 9 million to role players. So paying Perk 9 mil a year is probably a bad idea.

Which is EXACTLY why I would be crying if we paid Jeff Green anything more than 5 mil per year... we'd be overpaying for a role player.

Further, we would have broken up a potential championship-winning team in order to do so.

That = mega tears

Re: Dan Shaughnessy article on the "trade"
« Reply #58 on: April 14, 2011, 06:34:17 PM »

Offline bbd24

  • NCE
  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1362
  • Tommy Points: 118
All I've got to say is that if we pay Green anything within 2 mil. per year of what Perkins extended for in OKC I'm going to cry myself to sleep.

Get some Kleenex.  Green's asking for what, 5/$50M (if the rumors are to be believed)?  

I don't get the whole sentiment toward's Perk's new deal supposedly being bad; do people even pay any attention to how much starting centers get paid?  I mean, seriously?  $8M a year for one of the better centers in the conference is an absolute bargain, IMHO.

IMO, the better bargain is paying free agents like Shaq or Jermaine a lesser amount and not missing a beat of what Perkins brought you.

JO this year's making about $6M, and he was signed to that deal with the full expectation that he was going to miss a chunk of the season (because he always does). 

Perk's going to make $8M.

I really don't understand some of you guys.  The Shaq and JO signings have worked out about as expected; we've gotten a little less than one combined season from the two of them.  That's what happens when you wager on old big men with bad wheels.  That'd be OK if they were there as depth, but you really want to be relying on guys like that?

Jermaine O'neal and Shaq combined, 7 million.  Perks new contract, 9 million.  All of them are suspect to injury, and one just missed the offseason and half the year from an injury few have come back 100% from.  Your going to throw 9M per at that player ?

Whats there to not understand ?

Again, the better bargain is picking up guys off the streets in free agency and putting them next to KG in the middle instead of paying Perk 9 M per.

You misunderstand why I'd be crying.

I agree that you don't want to play 9 million to role players. So paying Perk 9 mil a year is probably a bad idea.

Which is EXACTLY why I would be crying if we paid Jeff Green anything more than 5 mil per year... we'd be overpaying for a role player.

Further, we would have broken up a potential championship-winning team in order to do so.

That = mega tears

I disagree.  He's far above being a role player.  And he's 24.

He's just getting his feet wet in the league, and he doesn't even have a training camp yet under his belt with the C's. He's in a brand new and entirely different system. Regardless, you don't have to give or match a contract.  If you find a better player out there, you still have that option.

I'd sign him with the Perkins money saved in a heartbeat.

Re: Dan Shaughnessy article on the "trade"
« Reply #59 on: April 14, 2011, 06:55:03 PM »

Offline OsirusCeltics

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2013
  • Tommy Points: 198
I personally don't like him or Jackie MacMullan. They both have that "know-it-all" aura about them which I can't stand