next »

[wdleehi]

So the argument now...

"I COUNTER YOUR ARGUMENT BASED ON FACTS, STATISTICS AND COMMON SENSE WITH MY PERSONAL OPINION BASED ON NOTHING BUT HOW I THINK THE TEAM EMOTIONALLY FELT AND HOW GROWN MEN AND PAID PROFESSIONALS DECIDED TO PLAY LESS HARD BECAUSE THEIR BEST FRIEND PERKINS WASNT THERE."

No.


The argument is the Celtics needed a healthy C in the playoffs that season instead starter as a backup SF. 


Shaq was out (not a shock)
JO was hurt (not a shock)
Kristic wasn't good enough to beat out a hurt JO in the playoffs (not a shock)

[jdz101]

So the argument now...

"I COUNTER YOUR ARGUMENT BASED ON FACTS, STATISTICS AND COMMON SENSE WITH MY PERSONAL OPINION BASED ON NOTHING BUT HOW I THINK THE TEAM EMOTIONALLY FELT AND HOW GROWN MEN AND PAID PROFESSIONALS DECIDED TO PLAY LESS HARD BECAUSE THEIR BEST FRIEND PERKINS WASNT THERE."

No.


The argument is the Celtics needed a healthy C in the playoffs that season instead starter as a backup SF. 


Shaq was out (not a shock)
JO was hurt (not a shock)
Kristic wasn't good enough to beat out a hurt JO in the playoffs (not a shock)

Please do your best to convince me that perk was even 70% that year.

Also convince me that he would have helped against quicker bigs like bosh, when the eyetest and the statistics say otherwise.

[SHAQATTACK]

probably argue this one till the cows one home.....for me it's about what is happening today......move  on already

Jeff is playing  well now, seems happy, and has become a valued player.   That good enough for me.   And Perk is helping his team .

does it really matter t this point.......water under the bridge what ever

[tarheelsxxiii]

I'd have preferred to give Perk the money over Green. Giving it to Perk would've resulted in another championship. How can any level of productivity (undoubtedly mediocre/not worth his contract) from Green over the next X years be equivalent to a championship?

[Kane3387]

Perkins had 17 pts and 9 rebounds tonight. Jus sayin'.

He dominated gortat tonight! I still agree with huge trade.

[IndeedProceed]

probably argue this one till the cows one home.....for me it's about what is happening today......move  on already

Jeff is playing  well now, seems happy, and has become a valued player.   That good enough for me.   And Perk is helping his team .

does it really matter t this point.......water under the bridge what ever

That's mostly where I am at, at this point. Green has been playing well, and if he continues to do so, I thinknAinge does deserve credit.

But, while there is no way to know how Boston would've performed with Perkins in that series, doubt will always remain. They had great chemistry, a brotherhood which was pretty much shattered at the point of the Perkins trade. One year later, Ray takes less money to walk away. I'm not arguing causality, just that it was a watershed moment for the team. They never did lose a playoff series where Perkins, KG, Pierce, Allen, and Rondo were all healthy enough to play.

[fairweatherfan]

Hypothetical championships come a whole lot cheaper than real ones.  No way to know how we'd've done with Perk, but he wasn't very good in OKC the rest of that year either.

Meanwhile Green is starting to look like what Danny must've seen in him all along.  He needs a lot more consistency but we're paying him to be a key backup now and Pierce's replacement later.  So far...not bad.

Bottom line, Ainge's trade always made sense to me on paper, though all our big man injuries made it sting in '11.  But now it's starting to make sense to me on the court too.

[Kane3387]

If Danny was intent on trading Perk, he should have waited until the off-season.  Not only did the trade kill any chance we had at a title, but it's likely that we could have gotten somebody better than Green had we waited and moved Perk for a trade exception.  For instance, David West would have been a possibility, and he would have positioned the team better over the last two seasons.

I appreciate the view that Jeff Green is a star and has "ridiculous upside", but I'm not sure that it's accurate.

Hindsight.

No way Ainge gets the return he got at the time in the summer. He would have had no leverage because everyone would know he wasn't committed to Perk.

Very unlikely we dump Robinson's contract. No way we get the Clipper's pick which at the time was the gem of the trade. It looked like a potential lottery pick. Can't foresee "basketball reasons" sending CP3 to the Clippers.

At the time we had two O'Neals along with Krstic (he thought they would be able to give about 30-35 minutes between them with KG and Baby taking the rest) and no backup wing. We were expecting Pierce to go through Melo, Lebron, and then potentially be defended by Artest all by himself?

It had the potential to be a great trade all things considered. Why would he think a hobbled Perk on two bad knees would be better then Krstic and Green?

Strange...OKC didn't think Green was worth a $40 million contract so traded him to the Celtics who didn't think Perk was worth a $40 million contract for Perk. Perk got his money from OKC and has struggled but provided what Perk provides(toughness, leadership, defense, a proven warrior). Boston, thinking Perk wasn't worth $40 million instead decides to give that very same contract to Jeff Green after he took a year off of competitive basketball to have open heart surgery. Strange the way those two franchises took a look at those players and those contracts and think so differently about them.

It's not really that strange. It's need. They needed an enforcer and had kd harden and Thabo for the wings. We needed a wing and had two oneals, a ticket, a baby and were getting Krstic.

The market dictated greens deal. Just like it will flacco for example Should joe flacco be paid like drew Bree's? I don't think so. But he will be. Green deserves a deal like salmons or Marvin Williams for sure but the market skewed their value. So whether Danny thought green "was worth it" doesn't matter bc he either Annie's up or gets nothing. No brainer to me.

[IndeedProceed]

Ante's up. Like in poker, you pay the ante.

[tenn_smoothie]

No, we can't - not even close.

with Perk, the Celtics were leading the East with an excellent shot at the title in 2011 - this team, as much fun as they have been, isn't close to that team's level.

please don't play out the argument that, well, Rondo's injury in the 2011 playoffs vs Miami would have negated our title shot that year. we keep Perk and we probably have home court throughout the playoffs that season (unless the Spurs make the Finals) and we never would have seen Miami until the East finals.

and please save the argument about Perk's stats - his value, especially to this group of Celtics, goes way beyond the boxscore.

finally, may i remind you - Danny Boy has been looking for a solid center ever since he gave Perk away. that trade was an Ainge ego trip and he is still trying to justify it.

wouldn't you rather be sitting here tonight with another banner already in the rafters watching Danny trying to sustain an aging team than enjoying Jeff Green's improved play of late, which i suppose is the point of this thread ?

I actually would not.

You actually would not have seen this current team have their 2nd title already??

Then you must be either a transplanted Hawks, Magic, Suns, Jazz, Nuggets, Trail Blazers or maybe Warriors fan who loves an entertaining team that just plays for the 2nd round every year ....... or you are just insane.

[tenn_smoothie]

So the argument now...

"I COUNTER YOUR ARGUMENT BASED ON FACTS, STATISTICS AND COMMON SENSE WITH MY PERSONAL OPINION BASED ON NOTHING BUT HOW I THINK THE TEAM EMOTIONALLY FELT AND HOW GROWN MEN AND PAID PROFESSIONALS DECIDED TO PLAY LESS HARD BECAUSE THEIR BEST FRIEND PERKINS WASNT THERE."

your understanding of team sports dynamics must be zero.

and with this Celtics group in particular, the importance of emotion, togetherness, of the group, and of their chemistry on the court where they played on a continuous string on the defensive end, multiply the importance of those dynamics 10-times.

that team i'm sure didn't consciously play with less intensity after they lost Perk, but our heads are usually ahead of our hearts anytime we deal with traumatic change. thus, those Celtics could tell themselves to be professional and play hard all they wanted, but if they weren't emotionally in sync, they were always going to be a step behind physically.

[ImShakHeIsShaq]

So the argument now...

"I COUNTER YOUR ARGUMENT BASED ON FACTS, STATISTICS AND COMMON SENSE WITH MY PERSONAL OPINION BASED ON NOTHING BUT HOW I THINK THE TEAM EMOTIONALLY FELT AND HOW GROWN MEN AND PAID PROFESSIONALS DECIDED TO PLAY LESS HARD BECAUSE THEIR BEST FRIEND PERKINS WASNT THERE."

your understanding of team sports dynamics must be zero.

and with this Celtics group in particular, the importance of emotion, togetherness, of the group, and of their chemistry on the court where they played on a continuous string on the defensive end, multiply the importance of those dynamics 10-times.

that team i'm sure didn't consciously play with less intensity after they lost Perk, but our heads are usually ahead of our hearts anytime we deal with traumatic change. thus, those Celtics could tell themselves to be professional and play hard all they wanted, but if they weren't emotionally in sync, they were always going to be a step behind physically.

Just want to say, our hearts have no feeling, it's all in our brains. With that said, I agree, something like that "losing a brother" could mess you up no matter how hard you try to not let it get to you.

[crimson_stallion]

No, we can't - not even close

with Perk, the Celtics were leading the East with an excellent shot at the title in 2011 - this team, as much fun as they have been, isn't close to that team's level.

please don't play out the argument that, well, Rondo's injury in the 2011 playoffs vs Miami would have negated our title shot that year. we keep Perk and we probably have home court throughout the playoffs that season (unless the Spurs make the Finals) and we never would have seen Miami until the East finals.

and please save the argument about Perk's stats - his value, especially to this group of Celtics, goes way beyond the boxscore.

finally, may i remind you - Danny Boy has been looking for a solid center ever since he gave Perk away. that trade was an Ainge ego trip and he is still trying to justify it.

wouldn't you rather be sitting here tonight with another banner already in the rafters watching Danny trying to sustain an aging team than enjoying Jeff Green's improved play of late, which i suppose is the point of this thread ?

I actually would not.

You actually would not have seen this current team have their 2nd title already??

Then you must be either a transplanted Hawks, Magic, Suns, Jazz, Nuggets, Trail Blazers or maybe Warriors fan who loves an entertaining team that just plays for the 2nd round every year ....... or you are just insane.

I've said this once, I've said this 10 million times (slight exaggeration)

1. Perkins suffered a season ending injury against the Lakers, and big men don't have a history of returning well from major injuries.

2. When Perk came back god knows how long it would have taken for him to return to form, if ever.  Also he could have gone 3 more games, reimburse himself, been out again.

For the above reasons, we have no way at al of even imagining whether we'd have won a title or even finished with a better record of we kept Perk.

Next thing:
3. We had Shaq, Perk, Jermaine and Semih Erden.  That's 4 centres on our roster, and all of them had been injured at some point in the season.  We had no way of knowing if wed have either one of those guys healthy come playoff time.  We needed a healthy center.

4. Perk was asking more than we could offer to extend his contract.  If we kept him we already knew he'd sign elsewhere the next season and we'd lose him for nothing.

5. In the trade, along with Jeff, we got Nenad Krstic.  He was a solid big who had been healthy all season.

Put all of this together and Danny would have been an absolute moron to keep Perk.  He had no choice as a GM bit to trade him, and right now I think were better off with KG at center anyway.

[Roy H.]

If Danny was intent on trading Perk, he should have waited until the off-season.  Not only did the trade kill any chance we had at a title, but it's likely that we could have gotten somebody better than Green had we waited and moved Perk for a trade exception.  For instance, David West would have been a possibility, and he would have positioned the team better over the last two seasons.

I appreciate the view that Jeff Green is a star and has "ridiculous upside", but I'm not sure that it's accurate.

Hindsight.

No way Ainge gets the return he got at the time in the summer. He would have had no leverage because everyone would know he wasn't committed to Perk.

Very unlikely we dump Robinson's contract. No way we get the Clipper's pick which at the time was the gem of the trade. It looked like a potential lottery pick. Can't foresee "basketball reasons" sending CP3 to the Clippers.

At the time we had two O'Neals along with Krstic (he thought they would be able to give about 30-35 minutes between them with KG and Baby taking the rest) and no backup wing. We were expecting Pierce to go through Melo, Lebron, and then potentially be defended by Artest all by himself?

It had the potential to be a great trade all things considered. Why would he think a hobbled Perk on two bad knees would be better then Krstic and Green?

Haha.  Hindsight?  I was making these arguments on the day of the trade.

Concerned about chemistry and the loss of swagger?  Check.

Concerned about Green's toughness?  Check.

Concerned that the new guys wouldn't pick up the system?  Check.

Concerned that the team's championship hopes -- which were very much alive -- would be tanked?  Check.

The suggestion that we should have kept Perk for a trade exception?  Check.

http://www.celticsblog.com/2011/2/25/2013952/dannys-folly

Evaluate my argument as you will, but it's definitely not hindsight.

[Vermont Green]

So who would trade Green, Sullinger, Krstic, and $4.5M (what it cost OKC to cut Nate) to get Perk back right now?

The argument that the trade hurt chemistry does have some weight but it is really the only argument against it.

Someone said that after the trade, we won 5 straight, then Shaq got hurt or we found out how much he was hurt.  How does anyone know that it wasn't that which hurt team spirit?

If the team really stopped playing just becasue of a trade (a trade of a player who only played 12 games that season), to me that is another type of problem altogether.