Dan Shaughnessy article on the "trade"

[Dunn]

Look let me say I can see both sides to opinion of this trade. It's just good business, not personal. This trade was only insulting in keeping two offensive bigs in Baby and Krstic who proved to be as unnecessary to this team and their system. I actually gave Danny credit for thinking he'd work a trade for Sacramento center Jason Thompson who was available nearly all season. The move dealt only with Marquise but more should have been discussed.

[LB3533]

I still believe Danny made the right decision.

If he doesn't make the deal we are left with a depleted roster and no positive additions for the future.

We get hurt in both the "now" and the "future.

With this trade we still got a shot at "now" and the "future" is set up more nicely.

[CeltsAcumen]

While I agree with O'Shaughnessy, the major problem has always been what the trade left the Celtics:  A team with no chemistry trying to find an identity.

Why would you make this move when you are on a Championship run?  You don't.  This team had the mojo, the eye of the tiger and whatever else all rolled into one back in January.

I think the argument that if Perk wasn't traded the Celtics would be in a similar position ignores two points 1) Ainge could of gotten another quality 3 without moving Perk, Battier is an example and 2) this team would of run through molten lava to get another shot at the Lakers.

Ainge blew this team up for nothing more than $$$ and the possibility of competing after the big 3 retire and he will pay for it with his job if they don't get back to the Championship.  Rightly So.  

[wdleehi]

I get caught up in the "If Perk had signed an extension, the trade would not have been made" part.



If this trade improved the chance for this team to win, then the extension should have nothing to do with it.



If this trade is about the extension, then the Celtics are not pushing all in on this possible last chance for this trio. 

[ssspence]

The Marquis injury was even a bigger factor than Perkins contract, it forced Ainges hand.  

The injury certainly forced his hand into finding a backup 3.  I'm not sure, though, that Jeff Green was the only small forward out there.

It's my feeling the Cs could have kept Perk, and had Corey Brewer easily in the Carmelo deal (considering they basically cut him afterwards). The Cs could have sent Marquis and either 1) Bradley, or 2) Harengody & Erden to the Knicks as part of it.

To me, that would have been the right move for this year. The impact on next season? Well, at the moment, I can't say I really care, especially considering there may not be a next season.

[CelticG1]

A problem a I have with Shaghnessy, Felger and others regarding the Perk trade is that even if they make it to the NBA finals and lose in Game 7 they will say it was the Perk trade and Danny's fault etc.

Most likely if we go far in the playoffs and lose it most likely won't be because of that trade. It will be our core being another year older and our opponents being that much better.

Why don't they just say "if they don't make it to the eastern conference finals this trade was a failure" or something like that.

I know the goal is to win a championship but people act like it was a guarantee with Perk. If we made it to the ECF and ended up losing to the Bulls or something I would have to believe that Chicago is just that good and not "if we had Perk we would have beat them"

[Tai]

While I agree with O'Shaughnessy, the major problem has always been what the trade left the Celtics:  A team with no chemistry trying to find an identity.

Why would you make this move when you are on a Championship run?  You don't.  This team had the mojo, the eye of the tiger and whatever else all rolled into one back in January.

I think the argument that if Perk wasn't traded the Celtics would be in a similar position ignores two points 1) Ainge could of gotten another quality 3 without moving Perk, Battier is an example and 2) this team would of run through molten lava to get another shot at the Lakers.

Ainge blew this team up for nothing more than $$$ and the possibility of competing after the big 3 retire and he will pay for it with his job if they don't get back to the Championship.  Rightly So.  

How do we know we could have had Battier?

[feckless]

I still believe Danny made the right decision.

If he doesn't make the deal we are left with a depleted roster and no positive additions for the future.

We get hurt in both the "now" and the "future.

With this trade we still got a shot at "now" and the "future" is set up more nicely.

An articulate statement of my position.

[ScoobyDoo]

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.   

   

[Roy H.]

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?

[Spilling Green Dye]

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?

There is absolutely no way to know for sure if failure was the direct result of the trade. 

However, the fact is that this team performed as well or better with Shaq this season than they did with Perkins.  We do at least have that as a known commodity.  Therefore I'd argue any failure would be the result of the "big 4"

[Chris]

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?

There is absolutely no way to know for sure if failure was the direct result of the trade. 

However, the fact is that this team performed as well or better with Shaq this season than they did with Perkins.  We do at least have that as a known commodity.  Therefore I'd argue any failure would be the result of the "big 4"

Let me save Roy a post.  It's not a "known" commodity when the guy hasn't played in 3 months, and the only time he did step on the floor he was injured again within 5 minutes.  Unless we know for sure Shaq will be healthy throughout the playoffs (which we certainly don't), then we can't make that assumption.

[BudweiserCeltic]

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.

[Mr October]

Shaughnessy is overreacting. Perk didn't lead the Celtics to a 41-14 start. He barely played, and at that was only playing OK.

Even if the trade didn't happen I would fully expect the 'coasting / switch is off' finish to this season. The old legs are tired, the effort isn't fully there, and Rondo in particular isn't bringing it like he was. All that can't be blamed on Perkins or Green.

I look forward to seeing the C's prove a lot of people wrong as they make another big run. Go Celtics!!

[LB3533]

There is also the hypothetical that even if we kept Perk we may not have won the title.

We may have also continued to play .500 ball (4-3 with Perk before he got hurt at GS).

You have to look at things objectively at the time and currently too.

What were things that we needed help with?

What were things that were going to be a problem going forward if there were no moves made?

I feel like if we didn't acquire that wing player or another big man...we'd have put too much pressure on KG/PP/RA.

Right now, the only pressure and minutes that are going overboard on is for Baby.

I can live with that.