Author Topic: No denying it now ,the trade was/is too much of a risk(sorry DA)  (Read 17649 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: No denying it now ,the trade was/is too much of a risk(sorry DA)
« Reply #30 on: April 20, 2011, 04:49:34 PM »

Offline Marcus13

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2578
  • Tommy Points: 119
Yeah...there's just no reason for a team who is head and shoulders above the rest of the conference to be trading away half of its team.

Just a really ignorant move.  It's only when you see the team on the floor the way it's currently constructed that you remember how good we were the first half of the season.

Even though injuries were going to be a concern for the remainder of the regular season...it's not like we were going to fall any lower than we did anyway
Except that we were in no way head and shoulders above the conference, especially after Quis got hurt. 

Which is why the trade for Parker should have been made, an easy replacement at one spot off the bench
And what makes you think it was available?  And for what price?

For Harangody and Erden ; we chose the pick over taking Parker

Re: No denying it now ,the trade was/is too much of a risk(sorry DA)
« Reply #31 on: April 20, 2011, 05:07:51 PM »

Offline Chris

  • Global Moderator
  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18008
  • Tommy Points: 642
Yeah...there's just no reason for a team who is head and shoulders above the rest of the conference to be trading away half of its team.

Just a really ignorant move.  It's only when you see the team on the floor the way it's currently constructed that you remember how good we were the first half of the season.

Even though injuries were going to be a concern for the remainder of the regular season...it's not like we were going to fall any lower than we did anyway
Except that we were in no way head and shoulders above the conference, especially after Quis got hurt.  

Which is why the trade for Parker should have been made, an easy replacement at one spot off the bench
And what makes you think it was available?  And for what price?

For Harangody and Erden ; we chose the pick over taking Parker

Yeah, I don't think that was the case.  There are a lot of things that I am not sure of in this world, but one think I am sure of is that they would have loved to have Anthony Parker in that trade, over signing Sasha Pavlovic.

Edit: unless you mean the C's chose not to give up the first round pick that Cleveland reportedly wanted for him.  Then I would agree that the C's chose the pick over Parker.  But not the second round pick (which they may never see).

Re: No denying it now ,the trade was/is too much of a risk(sorry DA)
« Reply #32 on: April 20, 2011, 05:21:39 PM »

Offline the_Bird

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3244
  • Tommy Points: 176
Yeah...there's just no reason for a team who is head and shoulders above the rest of the conference to be trading away half of its team.

Just a really ignorant move.  It's only when you see the team on the floor the way it's currently constructed that you remember how good we were the first half of the season.

Even though injuries were going to be a concern for the remainder of the regular season...it's not like we were going to fall any lower than we did anyway
Except that we were in no way head and shoulders above the conference, especially after Quis got hurt.  

Which is why the trade for Parker should have been made, an easy replacement at one spot off the bench
And what makes you think it was available?  And for what price?

For Harangody and Erden ; we chose the pick over taking Parker

Yeah, I don't think that was the case.  There are a lot of things that I am not sure of in this world, but one think I am sure of is that they would have loved to have Anthony Parker in that trade, over signing Sasha Pavlovic.

Edit: unless you mean the C's chose not to give up the first round pick that Cleveland reportedly wanted for him.  Then I would agree that the C's chose the pick over Parker.  But not the second round pick (which they may never see).

I just can't believe that if Danny calls up Cleveland and says "Give me Anthony Parker, we'll give you Semih, we'll give you 'Gody, and we'll give you $2M cash" that Cleveland says "no."  

Every year, you see first round picks for sale, seems like $3M is about the adking price.  If the C's didn't want to give up the pick, give up the cash.  

It's not like Cleveland had any real use for keeping Parker around, anyway.  

They gave money to Sacramento to take Quis off our hands (freeing up the roster spot), right?

Re: No denying it now ,the trade was/is too much of a risk(sorry DA)
« Reply #33 on: April 20, 2011, 05:25:38 PM »

Offline stylo617617

  • Al Horford
  • Posts: 493
  • Tommy Points: 33
my theory on whats happening

danny & doc is playing even bigger possum than they did last year when doc practiced hard but let the team's regalur season suffer & let all teams think we were done. by conserving shaq untill MIA rd 2  & again letting teams think were weak i call this ..

waiting to awake the monster

well at least thats what im hoping for the dramatic's sake

Re: No denying it now ,the trade was/is too much of a risk(sorry DA)
« Reply #34 on: April 20, 2011, 05:29:14 PM »

Offline Lucky17

  • DKC Commish
  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16021
  • Tommy Points: 2352

I just can't believe that if Danny calls up Cleveland and says "Give me Anthony Parker, we'll give you Semih, we'll give you 'Gody, and we'll give you $2M cash" that Cleveland says "no."  

Every year, you see first round picks for sale, seems like $3M is about the adking price.  If the C's didn't want to give up the pick, give up the cash.  

It's not like Cleveland had any real use for keeping Parker around, anyway.  

They gave money to Sacramento to take Quis off our hands (freeing up the roster spot), right?

Gody + Semi + cash for Parker does not work according to CBA guidelines.

If you believe everything you read, Ainge offered Daniels and a 1st round pick, plus cash:

http://dimemag.com/2011/02/nba-trade-rumor-anthony-parker-to-boston-or-chicago/

I have no doubt that Ainge explored the Parker scenario to its fullest extent.
DKC League is now on reddit!: http://www.reddit.com/r/dkcleague

Re: No denying it now ,the trade was/is too much of a risk(sorry DA)
« Reply #35 on: April 20, 2011, 05:38:08 PM »

Offline jambr380

  • K.C. Jones
  • *************
  • Posts: 13770
  • Tommy Points: 2061
  • Sometimes there's no sane reason for optimism
I am really beginning to think that Perk just wasn't valued very high by Danny. So many people think that Danny couldn't help but accept this offer from OKC, but what if he was the one dangling Perk around? What if he just took the best that he could, knowing that Perk wasn't in the Celtics' future (even at $5 million)? Maybe he just wanted to get younger and more athletic.

There are always these hypothetical trades for Anthony Parker, Corey Brewer, even Gerald Wallace. Maybe Danny saw the injury to Marquis as an opportunity to get something back for Perk.

Re: No denying it now ,the trade was/is too much of a risk(sorry DA)
« Reply #36 on: April 20, 2011, 05:38:37 PM »

Offline the_Bird

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3244
  • Tommy Points: 176

I just can't believe that if Danny calls up Cleveland and says "Give me Anthony Parker, we'll give you Semih, we'll give you 'Gody, and we'll give you $2M cash" that Cleveland says "no."  

Every year, you see first round picks for sale, seems like $3M is about the adking price.  If the C's didn't want to give up the pick, give up the cash.  

It's not like Cleveland had any real use for keeping Parker around, anyway.  

They gave money to Sacramento to take Quis off our hands (freeing up the roster spot), right?

Gody + Semi + cash for Parker does not work according to CBA guidelines.

If you believe everything you read, Ainge offered Daniels and a 1st round pick, plus cash:

http://dimemag.com/2011/02/nba-trade-rumor-anthony-parker-to-boston-or-chicago/

I have no doubt that Ainge explored the Parker scenario to its fullest extent.

Fine, then two separate deals.

Anthony Parker for Quis and enough cash for Quis' salary.  That works, straight-up.

'Gody, Semih, and $2M - $3M for a heavily-protected second round pick.  Salaries don't need to match when it's minimum-salary contracts (plus Cleveland having all kinds of trade exemptions to play with).

My theory?  Danny looked into Anthony Parker, but then started talking to OKC about Jeff Green, and talked himself into the kid.  Talked himself into Shaq being OK come the playoffs.  Talked himself into Perk being expendable.  Talked himself into Troy Murphy and Krstic being able to provide decent big-man depth.  

Talked himself into what he believed to be a Red Auerbach trade, talked himself into this trade not hurting the team's 2011 chances and setting themselves up for the future.  Underestimated the severity of Shaq's injury, overestimated the severity of Perk's, and completely overestimated Jeff Green's ability.

Swing for the fences, you strike out a lot, you know?

Re: No denying it now ,the trade was/is too much of a risk(sorry DA)
« Reply #37 on: April 20, 2011, 05:46:48 PM »

Offline Lucky17

  • DKC Commish
  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16021
  • Tommy Points: 2352

I just can't believe that if Danny calls up Cleveland and says "Give me Anthony Parker, we'll give you Semih, we'll give you 'Gody, and we'll give you $2M cash" that Cleveland says "no."  

Every year, you see first round picks for sale, seems like $3M is about the adking price.  If the C's didn't want to give up the pick, give up the cash.  

It's not like Cleveland had any real use for keeping Parker around, anyway.  

They gave money to Sacramento to take Quis off our hands (freeing up the roster spot), right?

Gody + Semi + cash for Parker does not work according to CBA guidelines.

If you believe everything you read, Ainge offered Daniels and a 1st round pick, plus cash:

http://dimemag.com/2011/02/nba-trade-rumor-anthony-parker-to-boston-or-chicago/

I have no doubt that Ainge explored the Parker scenario to its fullest extent.

Fine, then two separate deals.

Anthony Parker for Quis and enough cash for Quis' salary.  That works, straight-up.

'Gody, Semih, and $2M - $3M for a heavily-protected second round pick.  Salaries don't need to match when it's minimum-salary contracts (plus Cleveland having all kinds of trade exemptions to play with).

My theory?  Danny looked into Anthony Parker, but then started talking to OKC about Jeff Green, and talked himself into the kid.  Talked himself into Shaq being OK come the playoffs.  Talked himself into Perk being expendable.  Talked himself into Troy Murphy and Krstic being able to provide decent big-man depth.  

Talked himself into what he believed to be a Red Auerbach trade, talked himself into this trade not hurting the team's 2011 chances and setting themselves up for the future.  Underestimated the severity of Shaq's injury, overestimated the severity of Perk's, and completely overestimated Jeff Green's ability.

Swing for the fences, you strike out a lot, you know?


Makes sense. Ainge explored the Parker deal, couldn't get Cleveland to pull the trigger, and quickly moved to the OKC deal.

Parker was the last best available wing on the market, if I recall.
DKC League is now on reddit!: http://www.reddit.com/r/dkcleague

Re: No denying it now ,the trade was/is too much of a risk(sorry DA)
« Reply #38 on: April 20, 2011, 05:50:22 PM »

Offline LooseCannon

  • NCE
  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11833
  • Tommy Points: 950
I think that Ainge was willing to trade the 2011 first-round pick, but that he was unwilling to trade any other future first-round picks.  That constraint probably kills a lot of potential deals out there.

At worst, "The Trade" is similar to Ainge and Lohaus for Kleine and Pinckney.
"The worst thing that ever happened in sports was sports radio, and the internet is sports radio on steroids with lower IQs.” -- Brian Burke, former Toronto Maple Leafs senior adviser, at the 2013 MIT Sloan Sports Analytics Conference

Re: No denying it now ,the trade was/is too much of a risk(sorry DA)
« Reply #39 on: April 20, 2011, 06:21:15 PM »

Offline 2short

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6080
  • Tommy Points: 428
I think that Ainge was willing to trade the 2011 first-round pick, but that he was unwilling to trade any other future first-round picks.  That constraint probably kills a lot of potential deals out there.

At worst, "The Trade" is similar to Ainge and Lohaus for Kleine and Pinckney.
:)  well if that is the worst than its ok, lohaus was a fringe nba player, kleine and pickney were 2 good role players for us for some time
of course in our trade we got the best athlete in green instead of giving up the best athlete in ainge and that draft pick

i for one like the trade, love perk but if you take out his low post defense he isn't a starting center
kleine compared to perk...........

Re: No denying it now ,the trade was/is too much of a risk(sorry DA)
« Reply #40 on: April 20, 2011, 06:22:24 PM »

Offline Adelaide Celt

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1400
  • Tommy Points: 216
Give me Perkins and a recovering Stephane Lasme over Green and Krstic. :(

Re: No denying it now ,the trade was/is too much of a risk(sorry DA)
« Reply #41 on: April 20, 2011, 08:18:53 PM »

Offline Yogi

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1606
  • Tommy Points: 255
   Guys relax!  It's the playoffs and we're up 2-0.  I know that some of you hate the trade, and I understand where you're coming from.  But before you denounce Danny and lament about what we lost...
   Let's look at our situation objectively.  Last year, in the first round, we played a team with D. Wade, an injured JO having his worst season, and a Beasley who was absolutely horrible.  We had our starting core healthy and intact.  We had Tony Allen to throw on D. Wade.  We had Perkisabeast.  Yet, during game 4 Wade went for 46-5-5 and handed us a loss in game 4.  We only won game 1 by 9 points, and game 3 by 2 points, and game 4 by 10 points.  We had one blowout game 2.  The Celtics were never a team that blew out inferior teams consistently.  We averaged 93.9 points and gave up 91.1 points for a differential of +2.8 last post-season.  We are averaging 91.5 points while giving up 89 for a +2.5 point differential in the two games we played.  
   This year we are playing a Knicks team with Carmello, Stoudemire and Billups.  It's true that 2 of these guys missed pretty much an entire game.  But Carmello and scrubs are still as good that Heat team that took a game from us last year.  To say that the trade is why these games are close and it would be different if we had Perk is rather unsupported by history.  
   Let's dispel a few myths regarding a trade right away.  
1)  Rondo lost his heart when Perk left.  FALSE.  Rondo has averaged 20 points, 8 assists and 6.5 rebounds shooting 48.6%.
2)  Ray Allen can't get open because we lost the great screens that Perk set.  FALSE.  Ray is averaging 21 points in 65.2% shooting.
3)  Our defense will suffer greatly without Perk.  FALSE.  We held one of the best offenses in the league to 89 ppg on 38.7% shooting from the field and 33.33% from three point.  
4)  Our overall defense might be great but we give up too many points in the paint.  FALSE.  Dwight Howard and the Magic allow 49% from the restricted area and 63% in the paint against the jump-shooting Hawks.  The Celtics allow 47% in the restricted area and a staggering 13% in the paint.
   We have two glaring weakness both of which plagued us last season; rebounding and scoring off the bench.  
   Perkins is hardly a renowned rebounder who would single handedly change this differential significantly.  Especially since so many of the rebounds we gave up against the Knicks were long rebounds off missed jump-shots picked up by the likes of Jeffries and Douglas who would hardly be influenced by Perkins.  This is a problem that we have suffered even with Perkins and one we will have to solve as a team.  
   Our bench has not shown itself in the last 2 games, but it has the talent.  There is no denying that West, Green, Davis and Kristic are all offensively gifted players who have started in the playoffs.  No blame should attach to Danny as this bench is a significant upgrade offensively from Nate, West, Baby and JO (You can include Pavlovic as a backup for Paul but he's untested and our chemistry would be even harder to regain with an additional player from the bench.
   We now have a true quality backup for Paul and the flexibility to go small which we did not have before.  Furthermore Nate had trouble especially against guards like Douglass who would shoot right over his head, and West who is a better player would have a reduced role.  Once our bench wet their feet as Celtics, our bench production should increase significantly and our offense will become much more potent.
   Our 4th quarter execution has been absolutely clutch and the big 4 still have their Mojo.  Let's see what these guys can do in MSG.  It's all about 18.
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: No denying it now ,the trade was/is too much of a risk(sorry DA)
« Reply #42 on: April 20, 2011, 09:15:04 PM »

Offline wahz

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 969
  • Tommy Points: 101
One final bit of Perk love. This is an awesome article, has everyone seen it?:

http://deadspin.com/#!5793919

Re: No denying it now ,the trade was/is too much of a risk(sorry DA)
« Reply #43 on: April 20, 2011, 09:24:12 PM »

Offline Vermont Green

  • K.C. Jones
  • *************
  • Posts: 13709
  • Tommy Points: 1029
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?

Re: No denying it now ,the trade was/is too much of a risk(sorry DA)
« Reply #44 on: April 20, 2011, 09:28:33 PM »

Offline blackberry33

  • The Green Kornet
  • Posts: 85
  • Tommy Points: 7
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?

another tp