Perkins would not have helped here

[Dunn]

Right, guess we should ignore the actual players themselves concerning the trade. The applauding of every locker room meant nothing at all. Statements like that of Derrick Rose of the joy his teammates had of the move. I guess I should just listen to the fans run down the former player who earned his ring in this town over players who played against him. They know what he brings to this team, rebounds, elbows, defense, and toughness(you know the opposite of Baby). I will take their higher opinion of him then listen to people who sound like Laker fans denying Perk's presence in last year's Finals.

[Brendan]

While players comments are interesting, I don't regard them as infallible proof.

[bruinsandceltics]

Agreed. It turned out to be an awful trade, but Perk would not have changed a thing that series.

[MBz]

Right, guess we should ignore the actual players themselves concerning the trade. The applauding of every locker room meant nothing at all. Statements like that of Derrick Rose of the joy his teammates had of the move. I guess I should just listen to the fans run down the former player who earned his ring in this town over players who played against him. They know what he brings to this team, rebounds, elbows, defense, and toughness(you know the opposite of Baby). I will take their higher opinion of him then listen to people who sound like Laker fans denying Perk's presence in last year's Finals.

Would rebounds, elbows, defense and toughness helped Paul Pierce protect the basketball?  A primary reason why we lost last night was turnovers.  We committed 17 turnovers while only forcing the Heat to commit 9.  That's a big difference.

[dlpin]

Whatever you think about the trade, here's why we lost:

- The heat were +27 with line ups that had Bosh at the 5 and James at the 4. They were -6 with all other line ups combined. Perkins would not be on the court with Bosh at the 5 and James at the 4.

[wiley]

I like the original post, though I disagree with the extent to which the thread title goes.  Perk would most definitely have helped.  You have to start with that and then ask how much.....

[dlpin]

Let's see how OKC does. They were knocked out in the first round last season...

And this season they have not faced anyone anywhere near the same level of talent the Lakers had last season. And Kevin Durant is much improved (25 ppg on 35% shooting last season, 30ppg on 47% shooting this season) as is Ibaka (7 ppg, 6rpg and 2 blocks last season, 10ppg, 8.6 rpg, and 4.1 blocks this season).

No one actually watching the OKC series would actually say their improvement is because of Perkins, who is getting thoroughly dominated by Gasol.

[Roy H.]

I've debated the trade too many times to count over the past couple months, and I'm exhausted.  Now that the season is over, I'm going to bite my tongue on it and move on.

That said, this comment from the original post in this thread makes no sense to me:

Perkins was only effective against two teams, the Magic and the Lakers.

I'm sorry, but to me that point just has no validity to it at all.  I'd encourage people who share this view to take your eyes off the ball when you're watching a game, and occasionally look at things like positioning, screens, rotations, team defense, etc. 

Perk was a very, very good defensive center for us, and a good rebounder, as well.  To think that he only defended two teams well just doesn't make any sense to me at all.  Like I've said before, reasonable minds can disagree about the trade, but I have a hard time accepting that any objective observer could think that Perk's effectiveness was limited to only two opponents.

[get_banners]

Old Perk...absolutely. He protected the middle so well. Current Perk...not so much. He's not right. The ACL from last year has robbed him of whatever athleticism he had, and the knee injury from this year (when he was still with us) is still bothering him. Perk would have been a statue and would have fouled out in 15 minutes against the Heat. Yeah, he might have inflicted some hurt on them, but it wouldn't have lasted very long. I hope the kid can get healthy again for his own sake. I'm not so sure, though...he's got to be the oldest young player in the league.

[jr_3421]

Perkins was great with us but even he said himself he's playing at 60% right now. He would give us toughness but you convince a injured Perkins would have made the difference. that's just ridiculous.

[Roy H.]

It this again. This debate is really be like a beef lover trying to convince a vegetarian that meat has healing powers.

If Perk was here, this is whats going to happen.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pa9BkcW1ebw

and people say he's going to deter people from scoring in the paint?

OKC's success would've come with or without Perk in the team.

Your post made a lot of sense until the video and your reliance upon it.  You know who else sucks as a defender?

KG:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=siNxz63BHec

Dwight Howard:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZA3Ha9tJwYI

Not very convincing...

[Vermont Green]

I liked the trade from the beginning.  Based on what I saw in the playoffs, I didn't change my mind.

I think it is OK to say, yeah, Perkins would have helped but I really don't think he would play much and he wouldn't have helped enough to change the outcome.

Green helped every game, and even Krstic helped this last game but neither of them helped enough to make a difference.  Heck, Nate and maybe even Erden would have helped in some way.

I look forward to both Green and Krstic coming back next year and the draft pick has value (probably in a trade).  I feel we are stronger moving forward than if we had Perk @ $8M and Nate @ $4.5M.