Looking at the Perk trade as of the Lakers' elimination (merged)

[GreenNote]

Now that LA is out, it is interesting to look at Perkins' value for OKC and what he would be worth with Boston at the moment. I do not think he will be of much use against Dallas if the Thunder make it to the next round but he would have been useful against Miami.

It's also interesting how the Mavericks built their team in order to beat the Lakers and how they will fare against other teams.

As far as Boston is concerned, it does not look like it will be crucial to have a low post defender who guards low post players but rather to have someone who can block shots or clog the lane to deter other players.

I don't want to praise or criticize or even bring back up the trade discussions too much but I think DA is looking better right now.

What are your thoughts?

[jr_3421]

Well my question would be, what does Perk offer that JO doesn't? Offensively I think weall can agree that JO is certainly an upgrade. Defensively JO protects the paint and gives good hard fouls. Plus Perk pretty injured right now.  The Mempis bigs have been killing him.

[Neurotic Guy]

Well my question would be, what does Perk offer that JO doesn't? Offensively I think weall can agree that JO is certainly an upgrade. Defensively JO protects the paint and gives good hard fouls. Plus Perk pretty injured right now.  The Mempis bigs have been killing him.

I agree.  Other than the fact that JO may be less durable and seems unable to play 25+ minutes, I don't see anything JO can't do as well or better than Perk. Other than scowl.

[Surferdad]

that the C's would not face Howard, Bynum or Duncan (unless you believe in witchcraft).  Still it is intriguing to think about, especially if the C's make the Finals and/or win it all.  This "center by committee" is still be a success!

[Surferdad]

http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=47580.0

[Marcus13]

He isn't a crucial aspect to beating Dallas at all.

However, his presence would be HUGE against Miami and Chicago.  One of the reasons we're losing is because Wade gets to the hoop whenever he wants to and the help defense has been abysmal when he's coming into the paint.  Perk would have helped turn him into a jump shooter which would have been huge.  It's not going to be any different if we advance and play Rose.

We needed to aquire a wing to put on LeBron while Pierce is out (Green's role) without giving him up...but who knows if that could have been done

[footey]

I think the more Jeff Green can make contributions on both ends of the floor, the better the trade will look.  Perkins' value was overstated, in my opinion. While the team went into a minor depression and slump following the trade, the emergence of Jermaine O'Neal as a steady contributor has made me pretty much forget about Perk.

[aporel#18]

OKC better play harder if they want to go through Memphis. Perk would have been useful against Howard, maybe Noah/Boozer, also against Bynum/Gasol.

I still think Marc Gasol/Zach Randolph is waaaay better than Perk/Ibaka.

I don't care about who comes out of the West. I just want the Celtics to win #18

[stylo617617]

uh oh not another perk trade debate !!!!!! lol i understand where your coming from though

[OsirusCeltics]

I think the more Jeff Green can make contributions on both ends of the floor, the better the trade will look.  Perkins' value was overstated, in my opinion. While the team went into a minor depression and slump following the trade, the emergence of Jermaine O'Neal as a steady contributor has made me pretty much forget about Perk.

Yup, same way I feel

[mc34]

Perk's blocks are wayyyyy down this season. You can tell the lift isn't there yet after that ACL surgery. The trade looks pretty good for now.

By the way, do you guys think JO has surpassed PJ Brown status yet?

[Jim on MV]

Perk was a MUCH better help/team defender than JO, even without the shot-blocking.  And the fact that Wade and LeBron (and D-Rose) are penetrators makes me think the Cs would be better off with Perk.  Perk looks bad now, but certainly no worse than Jeff Green.  If Green ever pulls his head out we could be in business, but I'm not optimistic for that this year.

Then there's the "chemistry" argument.  I was on a rec hockey team that went from worst to first by changing 2 guys on an 18-man roster.  Two guys.  And it's not as if the new guys were much better, or that the guys who left were jerks, it was just that the team just fit together after the change.  No more arguments, lots of joking around.  And lots of winning.  A team is more (Bulls, who only have one above-average guy) or less (Lakers) than the sum of its parts.  I cannot tell with the Cs what they are.

[Finkelskyhook]

Perk looks bad now, but certainly no worse than Jeff Green.

Jim, are we watching the same Perk.  It was Perk's rebounding and defense that kept OKC up in game 3. 

A lot of things with Perk don't show up on a stat sheet.  OKC is an infinitely better team with Perk on the court.

[Chris]

Perk looks bad now, but certainly no worse than Jeff Green.

Jim, are we watching the same Perk.  It was Perk's rebounding and defense that kept OKC up in game 3. 

A lot of things with Perk don't show up on a stat sheet.  OKC is an infinitely better team with Perk on the court.

Yeah, I continue to be pro-trade, but I don't buy any of these arguments that Perk has been anything other than stellar for the OKC.  He filled a major hole for them, and has really helped them climb to the next level. 

[Jim on MV]

Hey, I'm a huge Perk fan, but Gasol and Z-Bo have gone nuts on OKC.
It would be worse without Perkins, clearly.  But he just doesn't seem right to me, like KG didn't when when he came back.  It would be interesting to go to ThunderBlog (or whatever) and see what the fans there think of him.  I think he's a great fit for them (as he was for the Cs).