CelticsStrong
Around the League => Transaction Ideas and Rumors => Topic started by: rondohondo on January 01, 2013, 11:29:53 AM
-
OKC sends: Perk, Lamb and Toronto's pick ( likely top 10), possibly an additional 1st
Sac sends: Salmons and Cousins
OKC Roster
PG: Westbrook / Maynor
SG: Sefelosha / Martin
SF: Durant / Salmons
PF: Ibaka / Collison
C: Cousins / Thabeet
Cousins would give them the low post offense that could very possibly win them a championship. That's a great front line with Ibaka being the defensive presence/shot blocker, and Cousins providing low post scoring,passing and rebounding.
-
Why exactly would Sactown want a player in clear decline - Perkins - and a player who's proven nothing in exchange for Cousins?
Boston can make a better offer for those two in Green, Bradley and Sullinger.
And Danny should if Sactown is intent on moving TUJS.
-
Why exactly would Sactown want a player in clear decline - Perkins - and a player who's proven nothing in exchange for Cousins?
Boston can make a better offer for those two in Green, Bradley and Sullinger.
And Danny should if Sactown is intent on moving TUJS.
http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=61298.0
i suggested a similar trade...i think it makes sense...salmons is 33 and is the kings oldest player and the kings highest paid player...sacto will get younger at sf...salmons always hurt us when he was with the bulls...i would like him with the c's...
-
Sacto won't want to be burdened with Perk's contract (even giving up Salmons b/c Salmons is just better and thus easier to move), but OKC is a pretty obvious contender that could use Cousins and has the pieces to make a real solid offer.
I think something as simple as Lamb, Jones, and the Toronto pick for Cousins makes a lot of sense for both teams.
-
If OKC gets to add Cousins to Ibaka, Westbrook, and Durant, we might as well pack up the league, give the Thunder the title and go home, lol.
That team would be insane.
-
Sacto won't want to be burdened with Perk's contract (even giving up Salmons b/c Salmons is just better and thus easier to move), but OKC is a pretty obvious contender that could use Cousins and has the pieces to make a real solid offer.
I think something as simple as Lamb, Jones, and the Toronto pick for Cousins makes a lot of sense for both teams.
i don' see that happening...jones slipped to 28 in the draft because of worries over his knee...the kings already have evans, thorton and garcia at sg all making over $6M per year...this begs the question...why bradley instead of lamb...bradley has already proven he is prob the top defender at his position in the nba...if not...extremly close
-
OKC wouldn't be able to re-sign Cousins in 18 months time. They can't afford to pay him.
Not sure how much strongly they should pursue a player who would only be a rental + isn't a win-now player due to his numerous flaws limit his impact.
I can't help but think that Raptors lottery pick could net them something more valuable long term if used in a different trade.
-
I think something as simple as Lamb, Jones, and the Toronto pick for Cousins makes a lot of sense for both teams.
Yeah, I think an offer like that makes a lot more sense than trying to fit Salmons and Perk into it. Neither veteran really adds anything to the trade package.
-
I think something as simple as Lamb, Jones, and the Toronto pick for Cousins makes a lot of sense for both teams.
Yeah, I think an offer like that makes a lot more sense than trying to fit Salmons and Perk into it. Neither veteran really adds anything to the trade package.
here's where salmons for green fits in...assuming sactown wants to move cousins...they have to look good to their fan base...they can't just give cousins away...even with all the problems...he was a high lotto pick...salmons and green make about the same money...green is on the hook for a few more years...but...they get 7 yrs younger at sf...sactown is trying to sell high when cousins behavior has forced them to sell low...they are trying to get value in the sell high range...that's the rub...
-
OKC wouldn't be able to re-sign Cousins in 18 months time. They can't afford to pay him.
Not sure how much strongly they should pursue a player who would only be a rental + isn't a win-now player due to his numerous flaws limit his impact.
I can't help but think that Raptors lottery pick could net them something more valuable long term if used in a different trade.
Sure they could. Between the money on Martin and Perk it wouldn't be that hard for OKC to re-sign Cousins. They would have to move Perk as an expiring deal of course and not re-sign Martin, but it wouldn't be that hard to keep Cousins if they wanted to.
-
Perkins shoots 47%, cousins shoots 40.9%
Look at the records of the teams with Centers with low shooting percentages:
Toronto?
Indiana?
The Center's shooting percentage is basically a predictor of the overall team's success.
Cousins would make that team WORSE. Not a good idea.
-
Perkins shoots 47%, cousins shoots 40.9%
Look at the records of the teams with Centers with low shooting percentages:
Toronto?
Indiana?
The Center's shooting percentage is basically a predictor of the overall team's success.
Cousins would make that team WORSE. Not a good idea.
That's possibly the worst evaluation method ever. Doesn't take into account that Cousins would be joining 2 of the top 10 players in the league allowing Cousins to get much easier and better looks.
Perk takes like 5 shots a game and can really only dunk if he is wide open.Cousins is a much more versatile and dominant player. He just got a triple double against the c's.
Such a ridiculous statement
-
Perkins shoots 47%, cousins shoots 40.9%
Look at the records of the teams with Centers with low shooting percentages:
Toronto?
Indiana?
The Center's shooting percentage is basically a predictor of the overall team's success.
Cousins would make that team WORSE. Not a good idea.
That's possibly the worst evaluation tactic ever. Doesn't take into account that Cousins would be joining 2 of the top 10 players in the league allowing Cousins to get much easier and better looks.
Perk takes like 5 shots a game and can really only dunk if he is wide open.Cousins is a much more versatile and dominant player. He just got a triple double against the c's.
Such a ridiculous statement
Perk takes 5 shots a game because they have all of these other good players. They are the best, or second best team in the league.
A triple double does not a good player make. Sacramento is a terrible team. ...is a trade going to make Cousins stop missing shots?
If he were a "dominant player," he wouldn't miss so much. How, precisely, will the presence of better players improve Cousins' play? His shots all come - or should all come, pretty close to the rim. He is a bad shooter because he lacks real post game.
-
Perkins shoots 47%, cousins shoots 40.9%
Cousins is still a better player than Perk. Perk maybe can shoot better but Cousins can run the floor, shoot FT and rebound and pass.
http://www.nba.com/playerfile/kendrick_perkins/career_stats.html
http://www.nba.com/playerfile/demarcus_cousins/career_stats.html
I think DMC is a headcase but he is a better player today than Perkins. It is not even close.
-
Perkins shoots 47%, cousins shoots 40.9%
Look at the records of the teams with Centers with low shooting percentages:
Toronto?
Indiana?
The Center's shooting percentage is basically a predictor of the overall team's success.
Cousins would make that team WORSE. Not a good idea.
That's possibly the worst evaluation tactic ever. Doesn't take into account that Cousins would be joining 2 of the top 10 players in the league allowing Cousins to get much easier and better looks.
Perk takes like 5 shots a game and can really only dunk if he is wide open.Cousins is a much more versatile and dominant player. He just got a triple double against the c's.
Such a ridiculous statement
Perk takes 5 shots a game because they have all of these other good players. They are the best, or second best team in the league.
A triple double does not a good player make. Sacramento is a terrible team. ...is a trade going to make Cousins stop missing shots?
If he were a "dominant player," he wouldn't miss so much. How, precisely, will the presence of better players improve Cousins' play? His shots all come - or should all come, pretty close to the rim. He is a bad shooter because he lacks real post game.
First of all, I didn't say Cousins was a dominate player in the league, I said he is much more dominant and versatile than Perk.
Better teammates would help him because he wouldn't be the #1 or 2 option, so he can get much easier looks when Westbrook penetrates and Durant is being double teamed.
And perk takes 5 shots a game because he sucks on offense.
Are you seriously trying to convince people Perk is a better player than cousins? ::)
-
Perkins shoots 47%, cousins shoots 40.9%
Look at the records of the teams with Centers with low shooting percentages:
Toronto?
Indiana?
The Center's shooting percentage is basically a predictor of the overall team's success.
Cousins would make that team WORSE. Not a good idea.
That's possibly the worst evaluation tactic ever. Doesn't take into account that Cousins would be joining 2 of the top 10 players in the league allowing Cousins to get much easier and better looks.
Perk takes like 5 shots a game and can really only dunk if he is wide open.Cousins is a much more versatile and dominant player. He just got a triple double against the c's.
Such a ridiculous statement
Perk takes 5 shots a game because they have all of these other good players. They are the best, or second best team in the league.
A triple double does not a good player make. Sacramento is a terrible team. ...is a trade going to make Cousins stop missing shots?
If he were a "dominant player," he wouldn't miss so much. How, precisely, will the presence of better players improve Cousins' play? His shots all come - or should all come, pretty close to the rim. He is a bad shooter because he lacks real post game.
First of all, I didn't say Cousins was a dominate player in the league, I said he is much more dominant and versatile than Perk.
Better teammates would help him because he wouldn't be the #1 or 2 option, so he can get much easier looks when Westbrook penetrates and Durant is being double teamed.
And perk takes 5 shots a game because he sucks on offense.
Are you seriously trying to convince people Perk is a better player than cousins? ::)
Straw man argument much? Cousins is a bad player. He has a low field goal percentage. I am suggesting that adding Cousins to any team, would probably not do much for the team (unless that team was Toronto, or Indiana). He fouls a lot. He turns the ball over a lot. Of course, he also had a bad attitude, which probably means he's an idiot. And, let's be real - it's the smart players that are successful.
Jason Collins, Gerald Green, and Chris Wilcox are not going to compete for a Nobel Peace prize.
I was merely pointing out that - the second best team in the league is probably not interested in changing their schemes. Why fix what isn't broken? Plugging Cousins into Perkins' role would result in a net reduction in PPG, because Perkins has a higher field goal percentage that Cousins.
What would Cousins bring to the Thunder that they need, and do not have?
-
Still a better player than Perk today though.
I don't think he is a bad player. He is inefficient on offense. But he can pass well and rebound. Even with his low FG% he still outboards a lot of Centers in the league.
We would not need him to score. We play Jason Collins here who does nothing shooting wise. It is obvious you don't like the guy.
It's possible he has a low FG because he is a on crappy team. His FT% are decent. That shows me he can shoot a bit. I think he is mailing it in folks. Guys who can shoot FT usually can shoot jumpers. Do you think it is possible he has quit on his team? I do.
-
Ah, the romanticizing of a player who contributes little to the Thunder continues.
The Perkins love on this board has now officially reached the Silly Season.
We don't miss Perkins. Never have. What we miss is a competent offensive threat - which Perkins never was - at the 5.
-
Ah, the romanticizing of a player who contributes little to the Thunder continues.
The Perkins love on this board has now officially reached the Silly Season.
We don't miss Perkins. Never have. What we miss is a competent offensive threat - which Perkins never was - at the 5.
That is not at all what this discussion has been about. Reading comprehension fail.
-
It's possible he has a low FG because he is a on crappy team. His FT% are decent. That shows me he can shoot a bit. I think he is mailing it in folks. Guys who can shoot FT usually can shoot jumpers. Do you think it is possible he has quit on his team? I do.
So - this is my big issue with Cousins. I agree that he is a reasonably good rebounder.
I disagree with the premise that, "he is on a bad team, and therefore will be better on another team."
If he were a wing, this argument might hold water. However, as a Center, his job is going to be, more or less, exactly the same wherever he does it. Take, for example, Al Jefferson ...he has had more years in the league, and has basically been the same player wherever he's been.
http://espn.go.com/nba/player/stats/_/id/2389/al-jefferson
Same with Shaq (the lone exception being playing with Nash - and Rondo, which improved his efficiency tremendously).
http://espn.go.com/nba/player/stats/_/id/614/shaquille-oneal
Here's Duncan, for comparison purposes:
http://espn.go.com/nba/player/stats/_/id/215/tim-duncan
...Cousins' field goal percentage kind of is what it is. It's one of the most solitary jobs in basketball. Maybe, if he were hugely dominant, and getting double teamed every night, he'd improve by going to a team with another offensive threat. However, that's not what's happening. If Cousins were a legitimate mandatory double team, he'd simply have a higher field goal percentage.
Your argument that he may be, "mailing it in," begs the question of why you would want someone like that on your team. Really? Tyreke Evans, Thomas Robinson, and Jason Thompson can't get it done? He either is (a) not good enough; or (b) has personality issues that detract from his talent to render him not good enough.
I'll take a pass. And I think OKC does, too.
-
You couldn't convince me cousins FG% "is what it is". See Tyson Chandler before Chris Paul. The right point guard has a tremendous impact on a developing player, especially a big. Here's even an article on Tyson that mentions this.
http://basketball.realgm.com/article/225126
On another note, I don't think DMC will be going anywhere unless he really forces his hand. Even then chances of Celtics getting him are slim.
I've mentioned OKC having the assets to get DMC. That team would be scary. Really scary
-
You couldn't convince me cousins FG% "is what it is". See Tyson Chandler before Chris Paul. The right point guard has a tremendous impact on a developing player, especially a big. Here's even an article on Tyson that mentions this.
http://basketball.realgm.com/article/225126
On another note, I don't think DMC will be going anywhere unless he really forces his hand. Even then chances of Celtics getting him are slim.
I've mentioned OKC having the assets to get DMC. That team would be scary. Really scary
You have a point. ...but look at how many shots Chandler takes in a game, or in a year. He has never been a player who the team has expected to manufacture points.
Cousins takes many more shots, because he is expected to work with his back to the basket. I don't think that a traditionalist would see Chandler as a "dominant" center.
Chandler is a "good" player - but he is strictly a role player. You don't build a team around Tyson Chandler.
Now, if you're saying that we ought to significantly reduce our expectations for Cousins' performance, that's something else - but he's going to need to show he can thrive with fewer touches.
Cousins is not a guy through whom you run an offense. And I don't think he's a guy who accepts a reduced role. He's a player who takes a lot of shots, and misses a lot.
Chandler is a guy who never took a lot of shots, but did better at making the shots he did take when he played with a great point guard. ...mostly because he dunks the ball, and that's it.
-
So - this is my big issue with Cousins. I agree that he is a reasonably good rebounder.
I disagree with the premise that, "he is on a bad team, and therefore will be better on another team."
If he were a wing, this argument might hold water. However, as a Center, his job is going to be, more or less, exactly the same wherever he does it. Take, for example, Al Jefferson ...he has had more years in the league, and has basically been the same player wherever he's been.
http://espn.go.com/nba/player/stats/_/id/2389/al-jefferson
Same with Shaq (the lone exception being playing with Nash - and Rondo, which improved his efficiency tremendously).
http://espn.go.com/nba/player/stats/_/id/614/shaquille-oneal
Here's Duncan, for comparison purposes:
http://espn.go.com/nba/player/stats/_/id/215/tim-duncan
...Cousins' field goal percentage kind of is what it is. It's one of the most solitary jobs in basketball. Maybe, if he were hugely dominant, and getting double teamed every night, he'd improve by going to a team with another offensive threat. However, that's not what's happening. If Cousins were a legitimate mandatory double team, he'd simply have a higher field goal percentage.
Your argument that he may be, "mailing it in," begs the question of why you would want someone like that on your team. Really? Tyreke Evans, Thomas Robinson, and Jason Thompson can't get it done? He either is (a) not good enough; or (b) has personality issues that detract from his talent to render him not good enough.
I'll take a pass. And I think OKC does, too.
How does it make any difference if he is a wing, a PG of a center?
You even said yourself that Shaq's offensive efficiency improved signifcantly when he played alongside Nash and Rondo. Through the rest of his career in LA, Miami and Cleveland he never had a proper PG to get him easy shots. He was dominant regardless simply because he is one of the greatest centers to ever play the game, but combining him with proper pass-first PGs late in his career helped to keep him efficient even in his late 30s.
Cousins plays on a team that has no offensive structure. Everybody tries to just score themselves - everybody wants the ball in their hands. They have no proper playmaker to set guys up, they have no truly dominant scorer to nominate as the "take the last shot" type of guy. Their offensive setup is chaos.
It's very possible that Cousins offensive efficiency could improve dramatically once he is in an organised offensive system playing with the best passing PG in the NBA. Hell Chris Wilcox has a career FG percentage of 53%, but he's shooting 71% this season playing alongside Rondo. Most of that is due to all of the easy lobs he's getting which he simply has to finish. If Cousins' FG% were to increase from 41% to say 47% alongside Rondo then that's plenty efficient enough.
Also what's this "Decent rebounder" talk. Decent??? Cousins' rebound rate of 18.2% is actually better than Al Jefferson (17.9%), Marcin Gortat (15.9%) and Emeka Okafor (15.2%). It's on par with Dwight Howard (18.7%). Cousins is more than just a 'Decent' rebounder, he's an elite rebounder and one of the best in the league. Move him over to the worst rebounding team in the NBA and the rebounds are pretty much all his - at 22 years of age he has the potential to become a KLove / Varejao calibre rebounder in the years to come.
Also Cousins' assist ratio of 14.7% is exceptional for a center. It's right on par with Kevin Garnett (Kevin Garnett (14.2%) who is considered one of the best passing big men in the game.
Compare that to some of the other bigs that have been mentioned in trades and only Nene rates better:
* Al Jefferson (10.8%)
* Marcin Gortat (6.0%)
* Emeka Okafor (7.4%)
* Nene (21.4%)
People also say hes very turnover prone. His turnover ratio the last two seasons has been 11.85 and 11.74, respectively. Lets compare to the other bigs:
* Al Jefferson (6.58)
* Marcin Gortat (11.23)
* Emeka Okafor (11.3)
* Nene (13.58)
Looking at our other plausable trade targets at the centre spot, DMC's certain not the turnover-happy guy people seem to suggest. Before anyone mentiones Jefferson's rate, his is abnormally low and probably one of the 10 lowest in the league. Cousins' turnover ratio is about average, and on par with Gortat and Okafor.
-
okc is not even remotely thinking of disturbing their locker room with that kid.
-
If he was more established, I could see it.
But I see a team like the Thunder as an impediment of his growth.
The vet leadership of this team is Perk (according to everything said by the Thunder) He would be gone.
Durrant and Westbrook will limit Cousins touches to the point of frustration. (Heck, fans get frustrated when Durrant doesn't get enough shots)
Four or five years from now when these players are a little older (a key ingredient in making the three star Celtics work) and a little more likely to sacrifice, yes, it would make sense.
But at this point, his impact on the Thunder is not as great.
-
If he was more established, I could see it.
But I see a team like the Thunder as an impediment of his growth.
The vet leadership of this team is Perk (according to everything said by the Thunder) He would be gone.
Durrant and Westbrook will limit Cousins touches to the point of frustration. (Heck, fans get frustrated when Durrant doesn't get enough shots)
Four or five years from now when these players are a little older (a key ingredient in making the three star Celtics work) and a little more likely to sacrifice, yes, it would make sense.
But at this point, his impact on the Thunder is not as great.
Westbrook for Cousins.
-
If he was more established, I could see it.
But I see a team like the Thunder as an impediment of his growth.
The vet leadership of this team is Perk (according to everything said by the Thunder) He would be gone.
Durrant and Westbrook will limit Cousins touches to the point of frustration. (Heck, fans get frustrated when Durrant doesn't get enough shots)
Four or five years from now when these players are a little older (a key ingredient in making the three star Celtics work) and a little more likely to sacrifice, yes, it would make sense.
But at this point, his impact on the Thunder is not as great.
Westbrook for Cousins.
Not a chance.
-
So - this is my big issue with Cousins. I agree that he is a reasonably good rebounder.
I disagree with the premise that, "he is on a bad team, and therefore will be better on another team."
If he were a wing, this argument might hold water. However, as a Center, his job is going to be, more or less, exactly the same wherever he does it. Take, for example, Al Jefferson ...he has had more years in the league, and has basically been the same player wherever he's been.
http://espn.go.com/nba/player/stats/_/id/2389/al-jefferson
Same with Shaq (the lone exception being playing with Nash - and Rondo, which improved his efficiency tremendously).
http://espn.go.com/nba/player/stats/_/id/614/shaquille-oneal
Here's Duncan, for comparison purposes:
http://espn.go.com/nba/player/stats/_/id/215/tim-duncan
...Cousins' field goal percentage kind of is what it is. It's one of the most solitary jobs in basketball. Maybe, if he were hugely dominant, and getting double teamed every night, he'd improve by going to a team with another offensive threat. However, that's not what's happening. If Cousins were a legitimate mandatory double team, he'd simply have a higher field goal percentage.
Your argument that he may be, "mailing it in," begs the question of why you would want someone like that on your team. Really? Tyreke Evans, Thomas Robinson, and Jason Thompson can't get it done? He either is (a) not good enough; or (b) has personality issues that detract from his talent to render him not good enough.
I'll take a pass. And I think OKC does, too.
How does it make any difference if he is a wing, a PG of a center?
You even said yourself that Shaq's offensive efficiency improved signifcantly when he played alongside Nash and Rondo. Through the rest of his career in LA, Miami and Cleveland he never had a proper PG to get him easy shots. He was dominant regardless simply because he is one of the greatest centers to ever play the game, but combining him with proper pass-first PGs late in his career helped to keep him efficient even in his late 30s.
Cousins plays on a team that has no offensive structure. Everybody tries to just score themselves - everybody wants the ball in their hands. They have no proper playmaker to set guys up, they have no truly dominant scorer to nominate as the "take the last shot" type of guy. Their offensive setup is chaos.
It's very possible that Cousins offensive efficiency could improve dramatically once he is in an organised offensive system playing with the best passing PG in the NBA. Hell Chris Wilcox has a career FG percentage of 53%, but he's shooting 71% this season playing alongside Rondo. Most of that is due to all of the easy lobs he's getting which he simply has to finish. If Cousins' FG% were to increase from 41% to say 47% alongside Rondo then that's plenty efficient enough.
So I appreciate your analysis of Cousins' assist and rebounding efficiency. My analysis is centered on his FG%, so that's the part of your discussion that I'll address.
The first point you raise is that being a center is not substantively different from being a wing or a forward. That's not accurate. The center runs the show from the post. Once the center gets the ball in the post, he becomes almost like a point guard, deciding whether to score, or to pass the ball to a shooter. ...in that sense, a center is significantly less reliant on a point guard - except in one respect: the entry pass.
An entry pass, however, is not a terrifically complex move - at least not in the half court. Now, a great point guard may improve the efficiency of a player to a degree - an an offense where it is understood that the point guard is making offensive decisions. ...but Cousins doesn't, and can't, operate in such a system, because he's such a prima-dona.
With all due respect - I do not think 47% is "enough" for a center worth trading half the roster. Likewise, I do not think that Wilcox' performance this year is indicative of the effect Rondo would have on Cousins. Wilcox has take a total of 63 shots this year.
Cousins, who shoots 1000 shots a year, is going to have to create for himself - and, we have every indication that, when given the chance to do that, Cousins is likely to miss.
-
If OKC coaches could get Cousins to stop shooting jumpers, or any shots where his feet aren't in the paint, he'd be a most valuable offensive asset.
Defensively, they'd be a weaker team if Perk was in the trade. I really don't see any reason why Perk would Have to be in this deal. OKC could trade Lamb, Jones, the Toronto pic and one of their own firsts for DMC and that would be a pretty good haul. The could also shop out Reggie Jackson if that wasn't enough for Sacto.
OKC could bring Cousins off the pine and play him 25 minutes a night this season. They could reduce Perk's minutes down to 20 or so, and Collison down to 16. If Cousins bought in, that team would be an extremely tough playoff out, because it now has the one thing it was missing, low post scoring.