Re: PERK BEING PERK... OKC LOSES!
posted at 3/22/2011 12:37 AM EDT
In Response to Re: PERK BEING PERK... OKC LOSES!
[QUOTE]..... Bottom line is no matter what any GM does in trades does not equate to real quantifying real value. Theres only about 2 million examples of this in the NBAs history
Posted by Karllost[/QUOTE]
LOL you are dead wrong here K-Lost! What Danny got for Perk (in spite of his injury) is not even percieved value, it is actual, executed value.
Definition- Value; 1.An amount, as of goods, services, or money, considered to be a fair and suitable equivalent for something else; a fair price or return.
In a market, the value is set not by some accademic evaluation of a good, (or bystanders, fans, or critics or analysts) but by the market, the community of actual prospective buyers and sellers of the object in question.
In this case Perk's MINIMUM value was demonstrated to be equal to: one 24 year old #5 draft pick swing man with tremendous upside, plous one servicable starting center with a good outside shot and decent rebounding skills, AND in addition, a first round draft pick. In today's NBA that is MAJOR value. Why is that his MINIMUM value, because we will never know if some other GM might have beeen willing to pay more. But we do know that this GM was in fact willing to pay that much. in the actual market of NBA teams for NBA players.
In any case, in light of this trade, the Celtics decision to trade down for 27th pick Perkins eight years ago makes the celtics brain trust seem practically prescient. At least if you don't remember that they traded up to #10 for Marcus Bank in the same deal.
How "valuable " Perk is in terms of helping a team win basketball games will forever be a point of argument, debate, interpretation and doubtless varied opinions (read this forum archive on Perkins if you don't believe me.. or better yet Rondo.... ..... But Perk's value to the Celtics and the Thunder organizations as of the trading deadline 2011 has been clearly and unequivocally established.