My final thread on the trade

[birdwatcher]

I think what has gotten lost in all this back & forth is that Green was not brought in to simply back up Pierce--he was brought in to replace Posey's role from our championship year. Doc has said in a few interviews that he never was able to go small like he did with Posey, and they felt they had that in Green. Truth be told, this is something we rarely saw from Green, especially on the defensive end (other than a few series in the last couple of games). The idea that Perk would have played major minutes in the 4th quarter of any game in the playoffs seems like a stretch, since in our championship year he was benched in favor of a small lineup, disregarding the size mismatch with Gasol & Bynum on the floor. What's strange is we never saw Green closing out games--it was Baby all year and even into the playoffs until Doc finally realized that BBD is MIA.

For the people saying we could have gotten another SF and kept Perk--well, we got three buyout players of the same calibur as any available SF at the time. Murphy at PF, Arroyo at PG & Pavlovic at SF, all of whom never sniffed the floor. What makes anyone think that if Doc can't trust these guys that another "serviceable SF" to back up Pierce would have ever stepped on the floor? Green wasn't great but he did get on the floor for 10-12 min a game. If it wasn't for him, Pierce would have played 48 minutes a night, and Pierce is about the only one we could rely on to score when this team is struggling offensively.

Also, for the guys who say Perk made our offense better buy setting good screens...jeez, is that all you have to do to be a starting C in this league? Set a pick? He set almost as many moving screens per game as he did good ones.

I'm glad Perk is a leader in OKC, but I don't see much room for his leadership in a locker room filled with the big 3, Rondo & Shaq. Leadership is not what this team is missing, and we still put 2 of the 5 best defensive players in the league on the floor every night--if you give any credence to the all-defensive team awards--and we got a first round pick, Jeff Green (who will either be a quality role player or trade fodder for someone with parallel skills) and another C in Krstic that other teams may actually be interested in.

So IMO, trade=wash (as far as championship goes, cause we weren't winning with or with out it)
trade for future=win

[JohnBagleyValueMeal]

The first problem here is that you assume that turning over a large part of the roster was a choice.

I don't, actually. My point isn't to argue that "OMG THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE TRADED ANYONE." The point was to ask whether the contributions they have seen so far have been worth the price they paid. Obviously they had to get a wing when Quis went down. I don't think that necessarily means they had to turn over as much as they did.

The second problem here is that your comparison is deeply flawed. The sample you are using (8 playoff games) is small and Green is playing against much, much better competition with a much, much better player playing in front of him.

It's true that the sample size is small. But that's what the playoffs are--you have to deliver, you can't wait for things to settle to the mean. Whether Green has played against better competition than, say, Darrell Arthur, I'm not so sure. Green played plenty against Jared Jeffries and James Jones, too.

I'm not sure why Pierce's quality would effect Green's ability to put up numbers beyond Kyle Korver in the same amount of time, though. I mean, if Pierce wasn't as good Green would probably play more minutes, yes, but then we'd have to compare him to Shane Battier and Peja Stojakovic, and I don't know if that totally hypothetical situation would be any more flattering.

More importantly, none of them have EVER done what Green did for OKC consistently and out of position.

So are you saying that Green is *underperforming* then? If he's so much better than what he has done in this playoffs, that would be our only logical conclusion.

Regardless, I don't really care what Green did in OKC, much like I don't care what Perk has done in OKC. Im only interested in getting a sense of what value was added and at what cost. If you think that there is some other player that Green should be compared to, I'm all for it. Just give me the name and I'll do the math. I spent a good amount of time over at basketball-reference looking at playoff stats, but it's very possible I missed someone that would make a more appropriate comparison.

[The DarkPassenger]

Jeff Green has not worked yet in the Celtics system because he is playing an entirely different role and has to be an entirely different player than when he was in OKC. In OKC he was a leader, starter, and 3rd option for scoring and played out of position and wasn't horrible at it either, in fact he was good.

With the Celtics he is a role player, not a leader, has no voice really and is the 7th man off the bench in some cases. This system is not for every player and we learned that with Nate Robinson who went from playing fluctuating minutes with the Knicks to this solid system.

I'll briefly explain this without boring you too much. In the Knicks (D'Antonio's) when Nate was on that team there was no 1-12 set in stone rotation. Whoever played well got into the game and someone off the bench could easily see 35 minutes in a game if he was hot. That is not the case with the Celtics, it's a solid 1-5 and no chance of a bench guy seeing 35 minutes unless it's a blowout or someone gets hurt.

So when Green goes from being a leader, having a voice and being a relied upon scorer and a solid starter to being a 7th man on the bench who is not a leader yet and has no respectable voice. Right now he only has the chance to be a 6th man tops.

I think Green will be more of a solid and better player when he is looked at and respected as a leader on the team and is a starter. In the end we can't blame Doc or Danny for the hole that the team is in now. It's Danny's job to bring the players in, Doc to teach them everything he knows, coach them but it is up to them to execute plays and respect each other.  Maybe it's not Docs trust some of these new guys need to get but the veteran Celtics players.

[tenn_smoothie]

"In the end we can't blame Danny for the hole that the team is in now."


oh yes we can.

Ainge screwed up - plain and simple. he should have brought in another backup 3 after Marquis got hurt and maybe tried to find an extra rebounder for the playoffs - and left his team alone !!

his "ingenious" trade set in motion a set of events which were all bad for the Celtics. i'll never get over game 7 from last year or this team's lost opportunity. please, please get Ainge out of the GM chair. trade Jeff Green this summer while we can and only get players who fit the current team and who play the game like they actually have a pair.

[dlpin]

I don't, actually. My point isn't to argue that "OMG THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE TRADED ANYONE." The point was to ask whether the contributions they have seen so far have been worth the price they paid. Obviously they had to get a wing when Quis went down. I don't think that necessarily means they had to turn over as much as they did.

Let me reiterate what I said: the only players that the celtics gave up by choice and not significant injury were Harangody, and, if you assume it was inevitable that Perkins would be healthy, Perk. So the "turn over as much as they did" was not by design or default. The celtics would have had to sign the same number of free agents without the trades.

It's true that the sample size is small. But that's what the playoffs are--you have to deliver, you can't wait for things to settle to the mean. Whether Green has played against better competition than, say, Darrell Arthur, I'm not so sure. Green played plenty against Jared Jeffries and James Jones, too.

I'm not sure why Pierce's quality would effect Green's ability to put up numbers beyond Kyle Korver in the same amount of time, though. I mean, if Pierce wasn't as good Green would probably play more minutes, yes, but then we'd have to compare him to Shane Battier and Peja Stojakovic, and I don't know if that totally hypothetical situation would be any more flattering.

Pierce's quality matters for obvious reasons. Kyle Korver doesn't see the floor more because he can't beat Bogans for the spot. Green sits because Doc wants to play Pierce more.

But since you think the playoffs are valid basis for comparisons, why don't you do the same for Perkins, then?

Perkins is averaging 4.6 points, 7.2 rebounds, 0.44 blocks and a bit over 4 fouls in 28 minutes and 43% shooting and 50% ft.

That is similar to Paul George (6 points, 5 rebounds, 2 blocks in 26 minutes), Joel Anthony (4.6, 5.7, 1.5 blocks) and Antonio McDyess (5.7,5,0.9 in 24 minutes).

So are you saying that Green is *underperforming* then? If he's so much better than what he has done in this playoffs, that would be our only logical conclusion.

Regardless, I don't really care what Green did in OKC, much like I don't care what Perk has done in OKC. Im only interested in getting a sense of what value was added and at what cost. If you think that there is some other player that Green should be compared to, I'm all for it. Just give me the name and I'll do the math. I spent a good amount of time over at basketball-reference looking at playoff stats, but it's very possible I missed someone that would make a more appropriate comparison.

The point is that comparing this based on limited playoff experience when the whole team is underperforming and he is specifically playing against the best possible opposition at his position isn't anywhere near a valid comparison. Darrel Arthur backing up Sam Young and playing against Richard Jefferson is completely different from Green backing up Pierce and playing against Lebron.

In any case, if you value Green solely by these playoffs (and he was bad against he knicks but has been good against the heat), then you should value Perkins solely by these playoffs. And the Perkins we are seeing is not someone who would fetch a first rounder from anyone, much less a clippers 1st rounder plus other parts.

[dlpin]

"In the end we can't blame Danny for the hole that the team is in now."


oh yes we can.

this whole thing is Danny's fault - plain and simple. he should have brought in another backup 3 after Marquis got hurt and maybe tried to find an extra rebounder for the playoffs - and left his team alone !!

his "ingenious" trade set in motion a set of events which were all bad for the Celtics. i'll never get over game 7 from last year or this team's lost opportunity. please, please get Ainge out of the GM chair. trade Jeff Green this summer while we can and only get players who fit the current team and who play the game like they actually have a pair.

Yes. Because it is SO easy getting quality back up 3s and good rebounders...  All teams that have been looking for rebounders and back up 3s have been able to do so on the cheap, right?

And Ainge clearly sucks. All he did was take a team that was stuck in perpetual mediocrity to a championship and 2 conference titles without ever having cap space or a top 3 pick. I bet history is littered with GMs who have been able to do that. Let's fire him and hire McHale of Billy Knight.

[tenn_smoothie]

"In the end we can't blame Danny for the hole that the team is in now."


oh yes we can.

this whole thing is Danny's fault - plain and simple. he should have brought in another backup 3 after Marquis got hurt and maybe tried to find an extra rebounder for the playoffs - and left his team alone !!

his "ingenious" trade set in motion a set of events which were all bad for the Celtics. i'll never get over game 7 from last year or this team's lost opportunity. please, please get Ainge out of the GM chair. trade Jeff Green this summer while we can and only get players who fit the current team and who play the game like they actually have a pair.

Yes. Because it is SO easy getting quality back up 3s and good rebounders...  All teams that have been looking for rebounders and back up 3s have been able to do so on the cheap, right?

And Ainge clearly sucks. All he did was take a team that was stuck in perpetual mediocrity to a championship and 2 conference titles without ever having cap space or a top 3 pick. I bet history is littered with GMs who have been able to do that. Let's fire him and hire McHale of Billy Knight.

yes, it would have been quite manageable to have acquired a solid backup 3 - a little expensive maybe, but very doable. a decent (not all-world) extra rebounder, along with keeping Semih, would also not have been that tough. we got Murphy, didn't we - of course, he has been ineffective, but finding someone in shape and sharp was a reasonable acquisition.


no thanks to McHale and Knight - only Danny Ainge would hire someone like that. as for Danny Boy, you have a short memory - he has a good record in the draft, but his ADHD trade-a-month style that preceded the acquisition of Garnett was often disastorous. he kept building and then re-building a new team with a different style every few months before he found Allen and KG. almost felt like the Perk trade was a disastorous result of Danny's growing frustration with not being able to tinker with his lineup anymore, so he finally self-destructed and blew the team up.

[dlpin]

yes, it would have been quite manageable to have acquired a solid backup 3 - a little expensive maybe, but very doable. a decent (not all-world) extra rebounder, along with keeping Semih, would also not have been that tough. we got Murphy, didn't we - of course, he has been ineffective, but finding someone in shape and sharp was a reasonable acquisition.


no thanks to McHale and Knight - only Danny Ainge would hire someone like that. as for Danny Boy, you have a short memory - he has a good record in the draft, but his ADHD trade-a-month style that preceded the acquisition of Garnett was often disastorous. he kept building and then re-building a new team with a different style every few months before he found Allen and KG. almost felt like the Perk trade was a disastorous result of Danny's growing frustration with not being able to tinker with his lineup anymore, so he finally self-destructed and blew the team up.

Which halfway decent 3 was available for cheap? It took a 1st round pick to get 3 months of Shane Battier. The cavs reportedly wanted a 1st for Anthony Parker.

As for the "trade a month," so he should have given the Walker team more time to be mediocre? The Ricky Davis team more time to be mediocre?
If there is one thing about Ainge is that he doesn't waste time with teams that are clearly going nowhere. Atlanta has wasted half a decade waiting for a team everyone knows is 2nd round fodder to develop.

But the bottom line is this: can you name the available 3s who are good enough to play and did not require 1st round picks? Can you name the gms you would rather have than Ainge?

[footey]

I think that Perk's role here was over-rated. I also think Green has generally disappointed management on his contributions. He lacks the confidence of a younger Posey, the fearlessness to make big plays at both ends.  Green has "talent", but does not use it to the extent we would expect. He also lacks body strength, and can't keep stronger guys like Lebron out of the paint.

[SHAQATTACK]

Trade was a gamble.
 Given need for a Forward backup, Perks not wanting to resign for money offered. Looked good on paper.

Other factors...latter came into play

Shaq ..out
Celtics are tired , hurt and now months older than at preseason

The trade I think has its OWN impact depending on the series /team in question.

IMO ..."THE" biggest reason we're losing this series is HEAT have improved as a team. Not so much what we don't have or didn't do.  Moreover , LBJ has finally grown up or matured  and the Heat have finally put it together enought to where they can win by just wearing us down. (gameplan)  use their abilities to wear us out.

While , I think the trade was bad in that it seemed to disrupt the team .  

I would have rather just let Perk stay , stick to the core unit and let the season play out and see what happens , win or lose .

But, my final thought , is I think with or without Perk and trade we would still be sitting in the same boat playing the Heat.  On the losing end...this year.

Face it...They are now a better team than at the beginning when we stomped them .

SA spurs can probally say the same about Memphis or their demise.

[vinnie]

I wasn't directing anything at you specifically, KC. 

No but you were directing your comments at my posts, which I stand by whole-heartedly.  Danny made the trade because he was not into signing Perkins long term, and he got quality in return.  The main reason everyone beefed was because of the Howard, Gasol, Bynum matchups.  Those are no longer a problem.  Good job Danny.

Grat job, Danny. Your team is going to lose in the second round of the playoffs. That's what you get the big bucks for. I am sure that the rebuilding job around Jeff Green will yield bountiful championships moving forward.

[vinnie]

I remember many a post telling me how important Jeff Green was going to be in this seriese, He has had a couple of good spurts of play. Maybe 15-20 minutes total. Still waiting for that breakout game that puts the team over the top.

[JohnBagleyValueMeal]

Let me reiterate what I said: ....The celtics would have had to sign the same number of free agents without the trades.

I don't agree, but fine, let's pretend that every single deal was absolutely necessary. The question *still* must be asked how to evaluate the players brought in. I'm quite sure Ainge will ask this question, so I think it's fair for us to as well.

It very well might be that no better value was out there. Or it might be possible that we did get value, and the numbers can show it somewhere. You could also argue that the value is in future positioning--I've said I think it's either 2011 or 2016 for this team, but that's a fair point to argue. But the question is much more important than rehashing the "Perk vs Green" debate for the millionth time.

Pierce's quality matters for obvious reasons. Kyle Korver doesn't see the floor more because he can't beat Bogans for the spot. Green sits because Doc wants to play Pierce more.

I don't follow. Green sits because Doc wants to play PP more, of course, yes. But how does that explain the fact that Green's numbers when he *is* on the floor not measuring up to Kyle Korver's, or Darrell Arthur's, or Shannon Brown's?

But since you think the playoffs are valid basis for comparisons, why don't you do the same for Perkins, then?

Have I not been clear? I do not care about Perkins' stats with OKC.

The only reason I posted was to try to get out of the "Perk vs Green" debate that is so tiresome and fruitless. Instead, I want to focus on assessing what value we got, and trying to determine if it was worth the costs. Take Jeff Green's name out of it--if we focus on the numbers and try to put them in context of other similar numbers in the playoffs, maybe we can judge the output of the trade without making it about personalities or emotion.

The point is that comparing this based on limited playoff experience when the whole team is underperforming and he is specifically playing against the best possible opposition at his position isn't anywhere near a valid comparison. Darrel Arthur backing up Sam Young and playing against Richard Jefferson is completely different from Green backing up Pierce and playing against Lebron.

Again, when you're comparing outputs per minute it's totally irrelevant who the guys are playing behind. But sure, it's fair to say that the whole team is underperforming, and it's fair to consider the opponent. But I don't know that it excuses some truly awful turnover and rebounding numbers. Green's averaging more turnovers per minute than Tony Allen did last year...facing those same elite players. And I say again, if you don't think these are fair comparisons, please, by all means, suggest another player! I'm just an armchair guy looking for a new take on an conversation that is done to death by focusing on actual numbers rather than names.

FWIW, looking at Battier's numbers I absolutely would have traded a 1st rounder + more for 3 months--because those 3 months would have given us the best chance of winning a title in the next 5 years.

[jdpapa3]

I remember many a post telling me how important Jeff Green was going to be in this seriese, He has had a couple of good spurts of play. Maybe 15-20 minutes total. Still waiting for that breakout game that puts the team over the top.

And I'm still waiting for the game where Miami kills us inside or on the boards to give the people against the Perk trade a good case.

[jdpapa3]

Which halfway decent 3 was available for cheap?

You're gonna be waiting many moons for a logical answer to this question. I don't think the answer is out there.

It's funny because Jeff has filled in his role pretty [dang] well in these past 3 games and it's the other parts that have failed us in the effort to win the games(Doc/baby/refs not giving Baby deserved ft's in game 2 and KG/one-armed Rondo in the other.)