No denying it now ,the trade was/is too much of a risk(sorry DA)

[samantha28]

Perk just sat down for the half with 2 points, 3 fouls, and 6 rebounds.  To me he does not look 100% healthy.  At any rate, he played ok (a couple of nice ORebs) but had the worst +/- on the entire OKC team.

So yes, trading Perk was a risk, keeping him and counting on him to be healthy for the entire playoffs was a risk.  So what does one do?

TP!

I don't know if I should feel happy about Perk not doing amazingly because that means Ainge was right, or if I should feel bad because I want him to succeed! I think Shaq coming back would alleviate the pain.

[gar]

Perk is in a great situation with a team where he fits very well that is not to say he did not fit with the Celtics; but that the C's felt they had other options. We basically traded perk for a Marquis replacement and a back up for Shaq/JO. Why people should expect that much more just speaks to how pleased people were when it went down and many here thought we have put one over on the Thunder. How quickly people change. Maybe we had unrealistic expectations.Green has put up respectable numbers with marquises minutes. It is unrealistic to expect him to put up PP numbers with Marquis' minutes. Doc is not going to give him BBD's minutes because he does not know all the plays.

[aporel#18]

We can judge the trade when the Celtics playoff run is over. If they win it all, the trade didn't kill their chances of winning, if they don't win we'll argue about how the trade affected.

But I think we better think big. The traded has to be avaluated in the summer of KG. Clippers pick is a bonus, but the main reason was setting the Celtics better for 2012 while improving the chances for this year.

I think we'll see better play in every round. But I'm an optimist.

Go Celtics!!

[wdleehi]

As someone who didn't like the trade, I am holding onto this:





JO is playing much better then I thought he would.  If he can play more minutes, the Celtics have an interior defensive presence and rebounding they need.



Or at least this is what I hope happens.  I don't want an off season of second guessing and "what could have been"


I want a parade!!!!   




I want to happily say I was wrong, again.

[Roy H.]

Perk just sat down for the half with 2 points, 3 fouls, and 6 rebounds.  To me he does not look 100% healthy.  At any rate, he played ok (a couple of nice ORebs) but had the worst +/- on the entire OKC team.

So yes, trading Perk was a risk, keeping him and counting on him to be healthy for the entire playoffs was a risk.  So what does one do?

TP!

I don't know if I should feel happy about Perk not doing amazingly because that means Ainge was right, or if I should feel bad because I want him to succeed! I think Shaq coming back would alleviate the pain.

Perk is looking good now.  With 7 points and 11 rebounds through three quarters, he's already outproduced Green + Krstic + JO from Game 2.

And yeah, I'd like to see both teams look good, with the Celts prevailing over the Thunder in the Finals.

[dlpin]

Perk just sat down for the half with 2 points, 3 fouls, and 6 rebounds.  To me he does not look 100% healthy.  At any rate, he played ok (a couple of nice ORebs) but had the worst +/- on the entire OKC team.

So yes, trading Perk was a risk, keeping him and counting on him to be healthy for the entire playoffs was a risk.  So what does one do?

TP!

I don't know if I should feel happy about Perk not doing amazingly because that means Ainge was right, or if I should feel bad because I want him to succeed! I think Shaq coming back would alleviate the pain.

Perk is looking good now.  With 7 points and 11 rebounds through three quarters, he's already outproduced Green + Krstic + JO from Game 2.

On 2 of 6 shooting and the worst +/- on the team.

I don't say this to bash him, but people are acting like he is tearing it up on OKC.

[Roy H.]

Perk just sat down for the half with 2 points, 3 fouls, and 6 rebounds.  To me he does not look 100% healthy.  At any rate, he played ok (a couple of nice ORebs) but had the worst +/- on the entire OKC team.

So yes, trading Perk was a risk, keeping him and counting on him to be healthy for the entire playoffs was a risk.  So what does one do?

TP!

I don't know if I should feel happy about Perk not doing amazingly because that means Ainge was right, or if I should feel bad because I want him to succeed! I think Shaq coming back would alleviate the pain.

Perk is looking good now.  With 7 points and 11 rebounds through three quarters, he's already outproduced Green + Krstic + JO from Game 2.

On 2 of 6 shooting and the worst +/- on the team.

I don't say this to bash him, but people are acting like he is tearing it up on OKC.

Better than Green's 2-for-8  .  Perk's offense is rough tonight, but his rebounding and defense have been very good.

I mean, is there anybody out there who wouldn't be satisfied with 7 points and 11 rebounds from whatever starting center we role with?

(By the way, Perk doesn't have the "worst +/- on the team".)

[GreenFaith1819]

Perk just sat down for the half with 2 points, 3 fouls, and 6 rebounds.  To me he does not look 100% healthy.  At any rate, he played ok (a couple of nice ORebs) but had the worst +/- on the entire OKC team.

So yes, trading Perk was a risk, keeping him and counting on him to be healthy for the entire playoffs was a risk.  So what does one do?

TP!

I don't know if I should feel happy about Perk not doing amazingly because that means Ainge was right, or if I should feel bad because I want him to succeed! I think Shaq coming back would alleviate the pain.

Perk is looking good now.  With 7 points and 11 rebounds through three quarters, he's already outproduced Green + Krstic + JO from Game 2.

On 2 of 6 shooting and the worst +/- on the team.

I don't say this to bash him, but people are acting like he is tearing it up on OKC.

Better than Green's 2-for-8  .  Perk's offense is rough tonight, but his rebounding and defense have been very good.

I mean, is there anybody out there who wouldn't be satisfied with 7 points and 11 rebounds from whatever starting center we role with?

Umm...I'm happy with JO's 12, 4 rebs and 4 blocks in game 1......

[Roy H.]

Perk just sat down for the half with 2 points, 3 fouls, and 6 rebounds.  To me he does not look 100% healthy.  At any rate, he played ok (a couple of nice ORebs) but had the worst +/- on the entire OKC team.

So yes, trading Perk was a risk, keeping him and counting on him to be healthy for the entire playoffs was a risk.  So what does one do?

TP!

I don't know if I should feel happy about Perk not doing amazingly because that means Ainge was right, or if I should feel bad because I want him to succeed! I think Shaq coming back would alleviate the pain.

Perk is looking good now.  With 7 points and 11 rebounds through three quarters, he's already outproduced Green + Krstic + JO from Game 2.

On 2 of 6 shooting and the worst +/- on the team.

I don't say this to bash him, but people are acting like he is tearing it up on OKC.

Better than Green's 2-for-8  .  Perk's offense is rough tonight, but his rebounding and defense have been very good.

I mean, is there anybody out there who wouldn't be satisfied with 7 points and 11 rebounds from whatever starting center we role with?

Umm...I'm happy with JO's 12, 4 rebs and 4 blocks in game 1......

Yeah, when JO puts up 12 and 4, he's hailed as a conquering hero.  When Perk puts up 7 and 11, people point to his +/-.

(Of course, in Game 1 JO's +/- was -11, by far the worst on the team.  In fact, nobody else was worse than -4.)

[dlpin]

Better than Green's 2-for-8  .  Perk's offense is rough tonight, but his rebounding and defense have been very good.

I mean, is there anybody out there who wouldn't be satisfied with 7 points and 11 rebounds from whatever starting center we role with?

(By the way, Perk doesn't have the "worst +/- on the team".)

When I posted he had the worst +/- of the team, which changed after the latest Al Harrington three pointer.

The point is not whether he is better than Green. Is whether he warrants this much outrage.

And it is not like Doc would have had Perk chasing Jeffries and Walker on the perimeter last night.

[Roy H.]

The point is not whether he is better than Green. Is whether he warrants this much outrage.

For much of the past two months, the argument has, in fact, been whether he's better than Jeff Green.  Green has been called the best player in the trade and a future all-star, while Perk's contributions have been downplayed.

Sounds like there might be a shift in conversation, back toward "Even if Perk is better, he's not that much better to warrant this reaction".

[GreenFaith1819]

Perk just sat down for the half with 2 points, 3 fouls, and 6 rebounds.  To me he does not look 100% healthy.  At any rate, he played ok (a couple of nice ORebs) but had the worst +/- on the entire OKC team.

So yes, trading Perk was a risk, keeping him and counting on him to be healthy for the entire playoffs was a risk.  So what does one do?

TP!

I don't know if I should feel happy about Perk not doing amazingly because that means Ainge was right, or if I should feel bad because I want him to succeed! I think Shaq coming back would alleviate the pain.

Perk is looking good now.  With 7 points and 11 rebounds through three quarters, he's already outproduced Green + Krstic + JO from Game 2.

On 2 of 6 shooting and the worst +/- on the team.

I don't say this to bash him, but people are acting like he is tearing it up on OKC.

Better than Green's 2-for-8  .  Perk's offense is rough tonight, but his rebounding and defense have been very good.

I mean, is there anybody out there who wouldn't be satisfied with 7 points and 11 rebounds from whatever starting center we role with?

Umm...I'm happy with JO's 12, 4 rebs and 4 blocks in game 1......

Yeah, when JO puts up 12 and 4, he's hailed as a conquering hero.  When Perk puts up 7 and 11, people point to his +/-.

(Of course, in Game 1 JO's +/- was -11, by far the worst on the team.  In fact, nobody else was worse than -4.)

Well, I don't place much stock in those +/-'s...I see what they are there for, though.

I'm happy for Perk....but I'm also happy for JO. And Jeff Green will pan out. As soon as he stops thinking and just play. Some here have mentioned Jeff's issues as being how Doc uses him.

Whatever the case is, I believe that he and Nenad will be big for us - in due time. As for now? The pressure is on NY..and Boston has played well in NY this year, and I'm expecting the same.

At the end of tonight, OKC will probably be up 2 - 0 vs DEN..just like we are vs NY.

[dlpin]

For much of the past two months, the argument has, in fact, been whether he's better than Jeff Green.  Green has been called the best player in the trade and a future all-star, while Perk's contributions have been downplayed.

Sounds like there might be a shift in conversation, back toward "Even if Perk is better, he's not that much better to warrant this reaction".

No shift in conversation. I still think that Green is better.

My point is more "even if Perkins is performing better right now, it is only slightly so and Green still has a better future and we also have a draft pick."


Honestly, I liked Perk as much as the next guy. The code to call my phone at my building is 043. But this incessant need to rehash the trade as if it is the reason for our struggles is beyond me.


I still think that Green is better, but even if we were to admit that right now Perkins is performing better (though he was OKC's weak link in game 1), it hardly is the cause for our struggles.

[Neurotic Guy]

Perk and JO really shouldn't be compared by the numbers.  After seeing JO's impact defensively against the Knicks in both games, I no longer question whether JO has the capacity to replace what Perk gave the C's on the defensive end.  In addition, Perk can score 20 points and no one could or should argue that he's JO's equal offensively.

Of course, the question is whether JO can play without a significant injury and whether he can up his minutes to 25-30 per game.  Both of these are in doubt. 

The reality is that if DA believed that JO and Shaq would be healthy, the risk is effectively mitigated.  If they were healthy or Perk was hurt, or if Green was playing to his apparent potential, no one would be questioning the risk.   But, 'risk' is an intersting word -- there is ALWAYS risk in any trade since anything can happen. And, of course, with the benefit of hindsight it's a lot easier to handicap a trade...

[wahz]

The point is not whether he is better than Green. Is whether he warrants this much outrage.

For much of the past two months, the argument has, in fact, been whether he's better than Jeff Green.  Green has been called the best player in the trade and a future all-star, while Perk's contributions have been downplayed.

Sounds like there might be a shift in conversation, back toward "Even if Perk is better, he's not that much better to warrant this reaction".

well the idea that Green is the best player was idiotic before he played a minute. Okc gave us a first, their starting center, and a starting forward for Perkins after acl surgery and Nate.

By definition that would mean a healthy Perk was expected to be the best player given that two starters and a high pick were given up for him.