Is anyone still upset about the Perk trade?

[LeoMoreno]

I'm glad we traded him but for his own sake, not ours.

He was our defensive anchor. The end. Move on to offense. His role was to stand below the rim and/or box out when Rondo drives. In OKC he learned to shoot, rebound better, and become an even better role player.

Keep it up, Perk, a second ring is close.

[indeedproceed]

Yes. The starting center whose departure severely rattled the teams' best player by his own admission not leaving gives the Cs a better chance.

Yeah, sure, for a few weeks in the regular season, perhaps.

How about the playoffs? Rondo was so "rattled" by Perk's trade, that when he dislocates his elbow in Game 3 against Miami -- by his own admission the most pain he's ever been in playing basketball -- he comes back into the game in the fourth quarter and puts up a couple one-handed buckets. Then he plays out the next two games, with big minutes and one arm. Let me add to that, that this elbow was still giving him trouble over two months later after the injury.

So what does our despondent point guard do if Perk is there? Ninja backflips? Spit fireballs? Because if someone is going to suggest that Rondo wasn't giving his all, we've set a pretty high bar to clear, don't you think?

At this point I am feeling insulted on Rondo's behalf.

You're insulted on Rondo's behalf for a comment you made and got outraged over.

It's irrefutable that he helps out the Cs how much help is surely in contention, and unknowable.

of course it is refutable given the context.  Do Perkins and Robinson help more than Green and Krstic?  No one has any idea in that regard, but it is certainly not irrefutable.

Nobody has any idea whether having a legitimate starting center and keeping the chemistry of the last 4 years (to the trade) together would have been better than Krstic and Green, knowing the way Krstic and Green played?

I just don't even think its debatable

Green wasn't nearly as bad as you make him out to be, and who exactly plays the 20 minutes a game Green played if he isn't on the team (von wafer?, delonte west?).  Seriously, the Celtics had no backup SF on any kind on that roster without Jeff Green, so unless you are playing Pierce 48 minutes a night or playing very small, it absolutely is debatable.  Krstic also played in 7 of the 9 playoff games and was fairly efficient in his role (much more efficient scorer than Perk, and even his rebounding rate wasn't much worse).  

And frankly, how do the Celtics even field a team in the week after the trade without moving the injured Perkins for two healthy bodies.  

Perk was a shell of himself last year and wouldn't have helped the Celtics at all in the playoffs.  That to me is undebatable.  

I'd say Wafer and Pavlovic could've replaced a lot of what Green brought on his good days. They could replace all of it on their bad days.

I'd also say that you're overstating Krstic's 'efficiency', and understating Perkins' contributions to this team, both chemistry-wise, and as a defender. With Perkins out there in his first games back from injury, the offense was slightly worse, defense significantly better. With Krstic out there, the offense was slightly worse, defense slightly better, overall a wash.

And, while Perkins was statistically awful for the Thunder during the playoffs last year, the acclaim and praise he got from his new teammates for his leadership and poise were pretty evident as well. Just like Krstic's sudden offensive and defensive bump to his metric stats is evident when he came to the Celtics.

So, both players played worse for the Thunder than they played for the Celtics, but only one of them had a significant impact to the chemistry of their team, since by all accounts Perkins' departure significantly hurt Boston's for the latter half of the regular season (not saying they didn't try, but I think its pretty accurate to state that there was a bit of a cloud hanging over the team in the months after the Perkins trade), and bolstered OKC's.

Now factor in Jeff Green's heart problems, and inconsistent play. Now factor in Krstic's defection from the NBA, and now factor in the Clippers' resurgence, all but guaranteeing that the draft pick will be in the mid 20's.

I just don't see how, all that considered, people are somehow unwilling to concede that the deal in hindsight wasn't worth it.

Could we have gotten more for Perkins? Not at the time, because at the time Jeff Green wasn't in the situation he is in now, Krstic was still in the NBA, and the Clippers still sucked. I'm not debating that.

But in hindsight was it the right move? No more than picking Sam Bowie over Jordan was. Or Oden over Durant.

[PosImpos]

Wasn't upset at the time of the trade and nothing has changed my mind about it.  Long term, I thought it was best for the club. Short-term?  Iffy.

this is basically how i feel about it.

it hasn't really worked out at all like Danny had hoped, but hindsight is 20/20.  if Krstic had stayed, the Clips hadn't gotten Paul, and Green had no heart problem, I think the trade would look like a pretty good deal right now.

[BballTim]

  I'm sorry - I'm a little flabbergasted. This isn't refutable? Perkins missed a significant amount of time after the injury and then played like garbage when he came back. It is irrefutable to you that Perkins gave the C's a better chance? Really?   

Yes. The starting center whose departure severely rattled the teams' best player by his own admission not leaving gives the Cs a better chance.

  I'd love to see the quote where Rondo said that he was severely rattled by Perk's departure. Maybe Rondo wouldn't have had that hand injury to play through if Perk had stayed? He would have been free of any effects of plantar fascitis?

[indeedproceed]

  I'm sorry - I'm a little flabbergasted. This isn't refutable? Perkins missed a significant amount of time after the injury and then played like garbage when he came back. It is irrefutable to you that Perkins gave the C's a better chance? Really?   

Yes. The starting center whose departure severely rattled the teams' best player by his own admission not leaving gives the Cs a better chance.

  I'd love to see the quote where Rondo said that he was severely rattled by Perk's departure. Maybe Rondo wouldn't have had that hand injury to play through if Perk had stayed? He would have been free of any effects of plantar fascitis?

Yep. 100% healthy and free of any concerns.

EDIT: I can't find the quote and I'm sure you know the one Im thinking of. The one where Rondo said he let Perkins trade bother him too much, and that he had to realize it was just a business orwhatever...

[bbd24]

I was for it at the time and still am for it.  Perkins isn't worth the money he's getting, but that's the market.  Not his fault. You use the money you saved on his contract and get another body in here that is better than Perkins.

Not sure how anyone can be against it.  You got 2 pieces for 1.  Green, and the Clippers 1st round pick.  2 solid pieces at that.

I believe Ainge always has a plan, and he's already thinking above and beyond.  He's always prepared and there is a reason for everything. My gut feeling tells me Ainge is going to ultimately combine 1 of the 2 first round picks (Celtics own, or the Clipper pick, whichever is worse) with a player to get up to the top 10 in this deep draft.

i.e. Celtics or Clippers pick + Rajon Rondo = Top 10

The only other question is, who is he targeting in this deep draft ?  Austin Rivers is the likely candidate, but you never know with Ainge.  A Pierce future replacement ?  Big man ?  Shooting guard to replace Allen ?

[Moranis]

I was for it at the time and still am for it.  Perkins isn't worth the money he's getting, but that's the market.  Not his fault. You use the money you saved on his contract and get another body in here that is better than Perkins.

Not sure how anyone can be against it.  You got 2 pieces for 1.  Green, and the Clippers 1st round pick.  2 solid pieces at that.

I believe Ainge always has a plan, and he's already thinking above and beyond.  He's always prepared and there is a reason for everything. My gut feeling tells me Ainge is going to ultimately combine 1 of the 2 first round picks (Celtics own, or the Clipper pick, whichever is worse) with a player to get up to the top 10 in this deep draft.

i.e. Celtics or Clippers pick + Rajon Rondo = Top 10

The only other question is, who is he targeting in this deep draft ?  Austin Rivers is the likely candidate, but you never know with Ainge.  A Pierce future replacement ?  Big man ?  Shooting guard to replace Allen ?

he won't have to move up to draft Rivers unless a lot changes before the draft.

[bbd24]

I was for it at the time and still am for it.  Perkins isn't worth the money he's getting, but that's the market.  Not his fault. You use the money you saved on his contract and get another body in here that is better than Perkins.

Not sure how anyone can be against it.  You got 2 pieces for 1.  Green, and the Clippers 1st round pick.  2 solid pieces at that.

I believe Ainge always has a plan, and he's already thinking above and beyond.  He's always prepared and there is a reason for everything. My gut feeling tells me Ainge is going to ultimately combine 1 of the 2 first round picks (Celtics own, or the Clipper pick, whichever is worse) with a player to get up to the top 10 in this deep draft.

i.e. Celtics or Clippers pick + Rajon Rondo = Top 10

The only other question is, who is he targeting in this deep draft ?  Austin Rivers is the likely candidate, but you never know with Ainge.  A Pierce future replacement ?  Big man ?  Shooting guard to replace Allen ?

he won't have to move up to draft Rivers unless a lot changes before the draft.

Yep.  Just depends on how everything falls into place and where Rivers is placed.  Depends on who he's targeting as well.  Maybe it's not Rivers.

[PosImpos]

I was for it at the time and still am for it.  Perkins isn't worth the money he's getting, but that's the market.  Not his fault. You use the money you saved on his contract and get another body in here that is better than Perkins.

Not sure how anyone can be against it.  You got 2 pieces for 1.  Green, and the Clippers 1st round pick.  2 solid pieces at that.

I believe Ainge always has a plan, and he's already thinking above and beyond.  He's always prepared and there is a reason for everything. My gut feeling tells me Ainge is going to ultimately combine 1 of the 2 first round picks (Celtics own, or the Clipper pick, whichever is worse) with a player to get up to the top 10 in this deep draft.

i.e. Celtics or Clippers pick + Rajon Rondo = Top 10

The only other question is, who is he targeting in this deep draft ?  Austin Rivers is the likely candidate, but you never know with Ainge.  A Pierce future replacement ?  Big man ?  Shooting guard to replace Allen ?

he won't have to move up to draft Rivers unless a lot changes before the draft.

I suspect that if Rivers isn't slated for a lottery pick, he'll stay at Duke another year.

[bbd24]

I was for it at the time and still am for it.  Perkins isn't worth the money he's getting, but that's the market.  Not his fault. You use the money you saved on his contract and get another body in here that is better than Perkins.

Not sure how anyone can be against it.  You got 2 pieces for 1.  Green, and the Clippers 1st round pick.  2 solid pieces at that.

I believe Ainge always has a plan, and he's already thinking above and beyond.  He's always prepared and there is a reason for everything. My gut feeling tells me Ainge is going to ultimately combine 1 of the 2 first round picks (Celtics own, or the Clipper pick, whichever is worse) with a player to get up to the top 10 in this deep draft.

i.e. Celtics or Clippers pick + Rajon Rondo = Top 10

The only other question is, who is he targeting in this deep draft ?  Austin Rivers is the likely candidate, but you never know with Ainge.  A Pierce future replacement ?  Big man ?  Shooting guard to replace Allen ?

he won't have to move up to draft Rivers unless a lot changes before the draft.

I suspect that if Rivers isn't slated for a lottery pick, he'll stay at Duke another year.

What happens if someone at the dinner table gives him a guarantee at another location in the draft.  Does he stay, or go ?

I think he goes.

[Interceptor]

You're insulted on Rondo's behalf for a comment you made and got outraged over.

Negative. When you say that Perk not leaving gives the C's a better chance, because his leaving rattled the best player on the team, you're insinuating that Rondo wasn't giving his all. But put that statement next to his heroic performance in the Miami series, which happened in reality, and it stands out like a flaming pink elephant in a field of dandelions.

How on earth do you even reconcile those two things? The cognitive dissonance would blow my mind if I tried.

Could we have gotten more for Perkins? Not at the time, because at the time Jeff Green wasn't in the situation he is in now, Krstic was still in the NBA, and the Clippers still sucked. I'm not debating that.

But in hindsight was it the right move? No more than picking Sam Bowie over Jordan was. Or Oden over Durant.

Those comparison fit this situation like a bowling ball fits in a coffee mug.

With Oden vs. Durant, we can point to Durant's production and Oden's lack of ability to get on the court. With The Trade<tm> we can point to what we got in reality and... what, exactly? The opportunity cost of pulling the trigger is as clear as mud, because while we know the worst case (Perk walks for nothing), the best case is an mystery.

[indeedproceed]

You're insulted on Rondo's behalf for a comment you made and got outraged over.

Negative. When you say that Perk not leaving gives the C's a better chance, because his leaving rattled the best player on the team, you're insinuating that Rondo wasn't giving his all. But put that statement next to his heroic performance in the Miami series, which happened in reality, and it stands out like a flaming pink elephant in a field of dandelions.

How on earth do you even reconcile those two things? The cognitive dissonance would blow my mind if I tried.

I do love the way you hyperbole and conjure things to argue about. And I'm not even kidding, its colorful, and its entertaining.

What I said was 'severely rattled'. In what world is that synonymous with 'didn't give his all'?

And, I said in another post which you missed (which is understandable, I'm aware I'm not the center of everyone's universe. Just most),

only one of them had a significant impact to the chemistry of their team, since by all accounts Perkins' departure significantly hurt Boston's for the latter half of the regular season (not saying they didn't try, but I think its pretty accurate to state that there was a bit of a cloud hanging over the team in the months after the Perkins trade), and bolstered OKC's.

Could we have gotten more for Perkins? Not at the time, because at the time Jeff Green wasn't in the situation he is in now, Krstic was still in the NBA, and the Clippers still sucked. I'm not debating that.

But in hindsight was it the right move? No more than picking Sam Bowie over Jordan was. Or Oden over Durant.

Those comparison fit this situation like a bowling ball fits in a coffee mug.

With Oden vs. Durant, we can point to Durant's production and Oden's lack of ability to get on the court. With The Trade<tm> we can point to what we got in reality and... what, exactly? The opportunity cost of pulling the trigger is as clear as mud, because while we know the worst case (Perk walks for nothing), the best case is an mystery.

Well, what you're implying is that the best case is completely unfathomable. Perk could've been sign and traded with OKC. He could've resigned here for less money (which, at 6 mill a clip, which would be what, 30% less, I'd imagine nobody is wringing their hands about resigning Perkins), he could've maybe been traded for someone else or another package. He could've done a lot of things, but its not a complete mystery, and all the other options aside from 'walking for nothing' seem pretty attractive in hindsight when you measure it against a mid-20's 1st rounder.

[kozlodoev]

I was for it at the time and still am for it.  Perkins isn't worth the money he's getting, but that's the market.  Not his fault. You use the money you saved on his contract and get another body in here that is better than Perkins.

Not sure how anyone can be against it.  You got 2 pieces for 1.  Green, and the Clippers 1st round pick.  2 solid pieces at that.

I believe Ainge always has a plan, and he's already thinking above and beyond.  He's always prepared and there is a reason for everything. My gut feeling tells me Ainge is going to ultimately combine 1 of the 2 first round picks (Celtics own, or the Clipper pick, whichever is worse) with a player to get up to the top 10 in this deep draft.

i.e. Celtics or Clippers pick + Rajon Rondo = Top 10

The only other question is, who is he targeting in this deep draft ?  Austin Rivers is the likely candidate, but you never know with Ainge.  A Pierce future replacement ?  Big man ?  Shooting guard to replace Allen ?

he won't have to move up to draft Rivers unless a lot changes before the draft.

Am I the only one who thinks that forcing Rivers to coach his son on the pro level is a terrible idea?

[Interceptor]

What I said was 'severely rattled'. In what world is that synonymous with 'didn't give his all'?

My front door rattles when it's windy, still keeps the hoodlums out. What did YOU mean by "severely rattled", as it relates to giving the C's a "better chance"?

Chemistry? Sure, the C's went on a late-season skid, just like they do every year, but the cloud hanging over the team might have also had something to do with "old legs", "new players" (even if Perk stayed, we didn't have a backup wing), and "non-stop parade of injuries", just throwing that out there.

Well, what you're implying is that the best case is completely unfathomable. Perk could've been sign and traded with OKC. He could've resigned here for less money (which, at 6 mill a clip, which would be what, 30% less, I'd imagine nobody is wringing their hands about resigning Perkins), he could've maybe been traded for someone else or another package. He could've done a lot of things, but its not a complete mystery, and all the other options aside from 'walking for nothing' seem pretty attractive in hindsight when you measure it against a mid-20's 1st rounder.

All of those options are either varying degrees of unlikely, run the risk of Perk walking for nothing, or both of the above.

Why does Sam Presti sit on his assets-with-expiration-dates and take a chance at picking up Perkins in free agency, with the lockout looming and when anyone and their mother can make him an offer? Why does Perkins take a hometown 6M/yr discount when he turned down a 4yr/5.5M extension offer? What mystical "other package" from the future makes any kind of sense in February 2011?

It's one thing to advocate making bold moves and taking risks when the payoff could be huge, or when the alternatives are lame. But the Dwight sweepstakes or some similar blockbuster event didn't happen this summer, and there was a good deal right in hand.

[BballTim]

  I'm sorry - I'm a little flabbergasted. This isn't refutable? Perkins missed a significant amount of time after the injury and then played like garbage when he came back. It is irrefutable to you that Perkins gave the C's a better chance? Really?   

Yes. The starting center whose departure severely rattled the teams' best player by his own admission not leaving gives the Cs a better chance.

  I'd love to see the quote where Rondo said that he was severely rattled by Perk's departure. Maybe Rondo wouldn't have had that hand injury to play through if Perk had stayed? He would have been free of any effects of plantar fascitis?

Yep. 100% healthy and free of any concerns.

EDIT: I can't find the quote and I'm sure you know the one Im thinking of. The one where Rondo said he let Perkins trade bother him too much, and that he had to realize it was just a business orwhatever...

 So as long as we don't see any difference between "somewhat bothered" and "severely rattled", I'd agree with you. But clearly there's a difference, right?