My whole thing with the Perkins trade

[cman88]

Didn't danny just do what alot of posters siding with the players in this lockout are saying other GM's should do? avoid paying a player Much more than he's worth? and in turn avoid handicapping the team 9million$ a year for a role player.

Dont get me wrong, Perkins is a good defensive player...but he is horrible offensively and excelled with the celtics because he didnt have to worry about scoring being surrounded by those guys. Rondo needs more scoring in the post

and instead of letting him walk for nothing(which Perk probably wouldve done), he gets Jeff Green(who either can be a piece for the future as a player OR trade piece) and a Clippers pick that could turn out to be a lottery pick player

I understand the anger in many people viewing it(or blaming it) as a reason for not beating miami, but who knows if Rondo didnt go down in that series and BBD gave his usual performance. Perkins looked downright horrible againsts the Grizzlies/Dallas..and we played well with Semih/kristic starting

for a team looking at Rebuilding in a year or so, I think Danny made a pretty good choice to set us up for the future, rather than come out empty handed or with a marginal player locked up long term...Belichick does this type stuff all the time, trading Moss, waiving merriweather

if more GM's were as hesitant as DA in overpaying for roleplayers, more teams would be in better shape

[jdz101]

Good call. Have had this opinion since the trade. The fact that he's a big heavy dude with a knee reco and looked really underdone upon his return only rammed it home for me.

[Roy H.]

I think the issue some people have is that Danny compromised a championship in order to save money / "get something" for Perk.  For most people who don't like the trade, getting Jeff Green and a draft pick wasn't worth the opportunity to win a title.

Weren't we the #1 seed at the time of the trade?  And we fell to #3, with the team falling apart mentally?  That's what people didn't like seeing.

The inevitable counter-argument is "we wouldn't have won anyway, because Rondo got hurt".  However, if we didn't trade Perk, there's absolutely no probability that Rondo and Wade would have gotten tangled up at that exact moment.  With no Perk trade, we might not have been playing Miami in the second round, we might have had home court, etc.  There absolutely definitely would have been different minute rotations and different players on the floor.  Rondo's injury wasn't inevitable.

Also, of course, there are the people who wouldn't have minded carrying Perk's salary going forward.  There are others who assume that Perk could have been signed-and-traded for a decent deal, at the very least including a trade exception.  However, even without that income, it all comes down to whether you think Jeff Green + draft pick was worth a shot at a championship. 

[TheTruthFot18]

Even with Perk, we probably were not getting by the Heat. Chemistry problems included, I dont think his presence was really enough to make the championship difference.

And in reality the trade met many objectives. Don;t over pay Perk (injury, no offense) also got a center in return for bodies at the 5, find a suitable backup for PP (i'm sure he was glad to have someone decent come off the bench for him when needed) and create cap space in the future. Plus a 1st rounder never hurts (I hope its low  )

[cman88]

well, I think danny saw too though that we won with a hodgepodge of guys at center and our defense didnt really suffer...Perk only played in 12 games. we achieved that seed largely without him..

id say trading Semih Erden(who played WELL for us) was the mistake Ainge made. we couldve used him

you kind of have to also blame Doc for not changing rotations when stuff wasnt working in the playoffs....Kristic played well for us when he came here, started to get it defensively and offensively...

yet, he couldnt find the floor against miami when BBD was a black hole yet doc kept playing him. when he finally put Kristic in, he made an impact putting up 6 quick points..but it was game 5 and already too late..

when Rick carlisle noticed stuff wasnt working against the heat, he changed the rotations...

[Interceptor]

I think the issue some people have is that Danny compromised a championship in order to save money / "get something" for Perk.  For most people who don't like the trade, getting Jeff Green and a draft pick wasn't worth the opportunity to win a title.

I do not like this assertion.  Those "some people", whoever they are, certainly might believe that Danny compromised a championship with The Trade<tm>, but there's no conclusive evidence that either 1) we had a shot with Perkins, or that 2) the post-trade team DIDN'T have a shot.  We are still, after all, arguing about it.

The inevitable counter-argument is "we wouldn't have won anyway, because Rondo got hurt".  However, if we didn't trade Perk, there's absolutely no probability that Rondo and Wade would have gotten tangled up at that exact moment.  With no Perk trade, we might not have been playing Miami in the second round, we might have had home court, etc.  There absolutely definitely would have been different minute rotations and different players on the floor.  Rondo's injury wasn't inevitable.

Never mind that this is kind of a straw man (there are much better counter-arguments than that), that's not really how that works.  In your alternative no-Trade reality, things that demonstrably didn't happen in actual reality, might happen there.  KG's injury from February is re-aggravated.  Pierce sprains his ankle.  Ron Artest Dwayne Wade knees Ray in the thigh.  Etc.  Sure, we wouldn't see the exact same freak injury play out in a no-Trade world, but the slate would be clear for any number of equally ridiculous scenarios.

[Roy H.]

Never mind that this is kind of a straw man (there are much better counter-arguments than that), that's not really how that works.  In your alternative no-Trade reality, things that demonstrably didn't happen in actual reality, might happen there.  KG's injury from February is re-aggravated.  Pierce sprains his ankle.  Ron Artest Dwayne Wade knees Ray in the thigh.  Etc.  Sure, we wouldn't see the exact same freak injury play out in a no-Trade world, but the slate would be clear for any number of equally ridiculous scenarios.

How is it a straw man?  The exact same argument -- "Rondo was hurt" -- has been made dozens of times on this blog.  However, there was no inevitability to that injury, as you admit.  It's very possible -- even probable -- that if we still had Perk, Rondo never would have been injured.

There's no guarantee that we would have done better with Perk, but I think the likelihood is high that we would have, especially in light of the fact that Danny apparently knew that there was a strong chance that Shaq wouldn't be back for the playoffs.  Danny traded the starting center from a lineup that had never lost a playoff series.  Doc has admitted that that hurt the team, and said that he wouldn't do the trade at the deadline again.  I think it's fair, then, for people to think that Danny's decision hurt our chances.

[Moranis]

I think the issue some people have is that Danny compromised a championship in order to save money / "get something" for Perk.  For most people who don't like the trade, getting Jeff Green and a draft pick wasn't worth the opportunity to win a title.

Weren't we the #1 seed at the time of the trade?  And we fell to #3, with the team falling apart mentally?  That's what people didn't like seeing.

The inevitable counter-argument is "we wouldn't have won anyway, because Rondo got hurt".  However, if we didn't trade Perk, there's absolutely no probability that Rondo and Wade would have gotten tangled up at that exact moment.  With no Perk trade, we might not have been playing Miami in the second round, we might have had home court, etc.  There absolutely definitely would have been different minute rotations and different players on the floor.  Rondo's injury wasn't inevitable.

Also, of course, there are the people who wouldn't have minded carrying Perk's salary going forward.  There are others who assume that Perk could have been signed-and-traded for a decent deal, at the very least including a trade exception.  However, even without that income, it all comes down to whether you think Jeff Green + draft pick was worth a shot at a championship.  

The trade was February 24th.  Entering that day Boston was 41-14, Miami was 42-15, Chicago was 38-17.  By the end of March 6th - Boston was 46-15, Chicago was 43-18, Miami was 43-20.  

Boston would not have still been in first place (nor extended its lead) by the end of March 6th, without the trade.  The injuries to the wing players was to great to overcome and Perkins was still not back from injury.  

Boston wasn't going to beat out Chicago for home court, but could have possibly held off Miami for the 2nd seed had the trade not occurred, of course perhaps Pierce ends up getting hurt because his minutes increase or he is a shell of himself in the post season because he is gassed.  You just never know, but I do know I would not have felt comfortable with Delonte West, Chris Johnson, Von Wafer, and Avery Bradley (and Nate Robinson) being the main bench for any extended period of time (which is where the C's were on February 24th as Davis was starting at center). Perkins didn't play after the trade until March 14th, that is long time to be without any centers on the roster (JO didn't come back till later and Shaq never came back).  Adding Krstic was a solid move as he has legit size.

I actually have a bigger problem with the Erden and Harangody trades.  I think having them around would have helped post Perkins.  

[Fan from VT]

The other problem is that by "trading for something" to avoid overpaying Perk, DA essentially traded for another overrated guy WHO IS ALSO A FREE AGENT, and is also about to be overpaid, or else walk for nothing. The same situation as Perk! And remember, if he takes the QO, he earns himself a no trade clause for the year. So it was basically trading Perk for the top-half protected future clippers pick in a year when the C's were already a top-5 team. Questionable.

[BballTim]

Never mind that this is kind of a straw man (there are much better counter-arguments than that), that's not really how that works.  In your alternative no-Trade reality, things that demonstrably didn't happen in actual reality, might happen there.  KG's injury from February is re-aggravated.  Pierce sprains his ankle.  Ron Artest Dwayne Wade knees Ray in the thigh.  Etc.  Sure, we wouldn't see the exact same freak injury play out in a no-Trade world, but the slate would be clear for any number of equally ridiculous scenarios.

How is it a straw man?  The exact same argument -- "Rondo was hurt" -- has been made dozens of times on this blog.  However, there was no inevitability to that injury, as you admit.  It's very possible -- even probable -- that if we still had Perk, Rondo never would have been injured.

  The only way you could say Rondo would never have been injured is if we avoided the Heat in the playoffs. It wasn't a freak play where two players got tangled up, it was a deliberate move by Wade. You can argue that he didn't know Rondo's elbow would bend the wrong way when he took him down like that but the play wasn't any more accidental than Bynum's forearm on JJ at the end of the Lakers-Mavs series.

  Unless you're arguing that Wade would have been afraid to go after Rondo with his best friend hanging around under the basket on the other end of the court, which is entirely possible.

[Celtics4ever]

Perk didn't help OKC advance to the finals nor do I think he would have advanced us to the finals.   MIA was hot when they played us and LeBron played as well as I ever saw him play in the series against us.    I doubt it would have made a difference, MIA just dropped the ball after reaching the finals.  We were their finals.

I for one do not think Perk was a top tier center.   He was a good one and nice defensive one but he does not board well and was foul prone and provides little or no offense.   He was a superb team defender though and ate up space and no one walked on us with him as our enforcer.   I think he is definitely replacable but I realize I am in the minority.   He was a superb fit for us because he does not need the ball and D's up.  Really depends on whom that pick ends up now.  Danny definitely left us thin down low that cannot be argued.

[ManUp]

I just feel like we could've gotten more for Perk.

Jeff Green was the best player in the deal my ass.

You don't trade young starting NBA centers for unproven tweener forwards.

[Interceptor]

How is it a straw man?  The exact same argument -- "Rondo was hurt" -- has been made dozens of times on this blog.

There are better counter-arguments than "Rondo broke his arm, thus we wouldn't have won anyway", but you chose this easy-to-dismiss one, which only superficially represents the position of people who support The Trade<tm>.  As I happen to be one of those people, I should know.  I consider rigging an easy target for yourself to be setting up a straw man, and the definition of the fallacy agrees with me.  So there you have it.

However, there was no inevitability to that injury, as you admit.  It's very possible -- even probable -- that if we still had Perk, Rondo never would have been injured.

As I said:  if we grant you your alternate reality where Perkins was not traded, it's true that the extremely specific injury to Rondo very probably would not have happened.  However, all bets are off in terms of other freak injuries to Rondo and/or other players, and resetting the board makes such things possible.

I mean, think about it:  the freak injury to Marquis plays into this as well.  Danny would have had less incentive to go big with OKC, if he didn't also need a backup wing.  Seeing as how Marquis paralyzed himself on Gilbert Arenas' chest, certainly the Magic/Wizards trade played into that, which in turn was partially a reaction to Dwight Howard's performance in 2009-2010 against... Kendrick Perkins.  Now, if I continue this line of thought, I'll eventually wind up in "Ronald McDonald uses cheese soup to control America from a secret Volkwagon in the past" territory, but hopefully at this point I've adequately demonstrated the madness of chasing down the Butterfly Effect.

I guess where I am going with this, is that I think we ought to let sleeping dogs lie on the Rondo Arm thing.

There's no guarantee that we would have done better with Perk, but I think the likelihood is high that we would have, especially in light of the fact that Danny apparently knew that there was a strong chance that Shaq wouldn't be back for the playoffs.  Danny traded the starting center from a lineup that had never lost a playoff series.  Doc has admitted that that hurt the team, and said that he wouldn't do the trade at the deadline again.  I think it's fair, then, for people to think that Danny's decision hurt our chances.

Fair to think it, sure, it's fair to think anything that you want.  This soldier, though, believes that to assert it, to state it as if it were a fact, is incorrect.  There's enough meat on this bone for us to argue about The Trade<tm> until the heat death of the universe.  As evidenced by this thread, and dozens of others like it.

[Moranis]

I just feel like we could've gotten more for Perk.

Jeff Green was the best player in the deal my ass.

You don't trade young starting NBA centers for unproven tweener forwards.

Jeff Green was far from unproven and Perkins was far from young (being in his 7th year and barely playing that year due to injury).

Perkins has very limited value.  He is a good but not great rebounder (career RB% 16.5), his defense is vastly overrated because he is slow and can only guard certain types of players, his hands are awful, he is an ok passer, but has virtually no offensive game and is a bad jump/foul shooter.  Getting a player as good as Jeff Green, a 1st round pick, and Kristic for an injured center in the last year of his contract and Robinson was a pretty darn good deal.

[Fan from VT]

I just feel like we could've gotten more for Perk.

Jeff Green was the best player in the deal my ass.

You don't trade young starting NBA centers for unproven tweener forwards.

Jeff Green was far from unproven and Perkins was far from young (being in his 7th year and barely playing that year due to injury).

Perkins has very limited value.  He is a good but not great rebounder (career RB% 16.5), his defense is vastly overrated because he is slow and can only guard certain types of players, his hands are awful, he is an ok passer, but has virtually no offensive game and is a bad jump/foul shooter.  Getting a player as good as Jeff Green, a 1st round pick, and Kristic for an injured center in the last year of his contract and Robinson was a pretty darn good deal.

I agree that Jeff Green was proven...but proven to be a below average at everything wing who has far too much residual hype to be a bargain and is a free agent right now. The (protected) first round pick is really the only asset; not sure if that's the deal you do when you are a title contender.