Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from BiasLewis. Show BiasLewis's posts

    Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk

    Ok before everyone kills Ainge now. So you don't end up looking like morons let's allow this to play out the next two weeks. You don't want to end up coming back to the board and kissing Ainge's feet for getting X Y and Z.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from OneOnOne. Show OneOnOne's posts

    Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk

    In Response to Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk:
    The reason we had a great defense without Perk was because of who we played and how they were all playing at the beginning of the season  as well as having Shaq.  What's changed:   a.  The Heat are playing better than they were then, the Bulls are playing better than they were then, the Magic are better than they were at the beginning of the season and the Lakers are playing better than they were in mid-season.   b. Shaq was in the lineup consistently.  So, Perk didn't matter much.  I wouldn't be as worried if Shaq's history of injury in the last 4 seasons wasn't so consistent - MISSES A LOT OF GAMES AND IS HURT A LOT.  So, we had JON and Semih, too, right.  NO - gone and can't be counted on. So, look at the spread between our record and Miami's at the end of the 1st third of the season vs now.  Notice a difference? With Perk gone, we darn sure better have a healthy Shaq and we better have a better offense, because our D won't be as good.  Don't even talk about rebounding - we were getting KILLED on the boards before Perk came back and we're going back to that now.  Can we still win - absolutely.  But, don't think, my friends, that its going to be easier because you can't promise me that Shaq will even play a lot of games or be there for us in the playoffs! PS.  I like the trades.  I'm not arguing against them, just arguing against this sentiment that "its going to be ok - look at how well we did without Perk in the beginning of the season"!
    Posted by Celtsfan4life


    Best Post since the trade.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Celtsfan4life. Show Celtsfan4life's posts

    Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk

    Thanks, OneOnOne.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from jtkl. Show jtkl's posts

    Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk

    Defense is about rotating properly. Perk did it better than just about any center in the game. Not to mention. He Guards Gasol alot better than KG does because he can muscle him out of the paint. So if we do face the Lakers, I see problems. I also see problems with Chicago with Boozer and Noah. Danny is betting Shaq can stay healthy or JON get's healthy. I'm not real comfortable either is going to happen.

    Finally their is the whole team chemistry thing. For whatever reason, the vets thought Perk was an integral piece in what they did. Now they have new guys who need to learn our defensive rotations in a short amount of time. Of the centers we have it seems only Shaq is capable of being an enforcer -- when he is on the court. And while Perk was called for a lot of moving screens, he also set some the hardest screens in the game. Made players think twice about chasing too hard after Ray Ray. Not sure the news guys add that dimension. 

    We gained some things too. Better offense probably. Maybe even better rebounding with Troy Murphy (assuming we get him) but I am scared. I sincerely hope Danny is a genius and I'm dead wrong. 
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Celtsfan4life. Show Celtsfan4life's posts

    Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk

    In Response to Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk:
    In Response to Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk : On the topic of rebounding, when you shoot 50%, hold teams to 40% and race back on defense as part of the Tom Tibbs defense scheme you tend to not have as many chances at rebounds as your opponants do. Danny is rolling the dice for sure. Let us cross our fingers we face Chicago over Orlando round 2, I assume we get the 2 seed and chicago the 3. (actually lets hope we get the 1 seed and the Knicks or Hawks beat the Magic) and of course Shaq has to be healthy. Key to the season now. Can we beat Orlando w/o Shaq? Yes... b/c Green will give Turk and Anderson way more issues than someone like Marquis or Anthony Parker would have and Baby plays Howard great. Can we beat Miami or LA w/o Shaq? Probably not.
    Posted by rameakap


    Rameakap,

    your first paragraph explains why offensive rebounding is not our strength.  The issue is DEFENSIVE rebounding.  You're not trying to rush back down court when you're on the defensive rebounding end and the other team is OFFENSIVE rebounding.  That's the issue.   Perk was never important in offensive rebounding and I don't care about that.  Its keeping the OTHER team off their offensive boards that's an issue.

    Yes, Danny is taking a risk, but I'm guessing that he is banking on the other 5 + Green + Shaq to carry us through.  Also, let's not forget Danny knows Shaq's health and JON's surgery results while the rest of us don't.  He may know that they'll be ok while we all think they'll be injured all season.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from OneOnOne. Show OneOnOne's posts

    Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk

    In Response to Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk:
    Thanks, OneOnOne.
    Posted by Celtsfan4life


    YW- Keep up the good posts.  I will let you know when your straying. LOL
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from BiasLewis. Show BiasLewis's posts

    Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk

    In Response to Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk:
    In Response to Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk :   you make me sick, you think you understand basketball and you may, but your tongue would destroy and team you played on, easy to defeat negative people, if I was you I would let up on Perk it makes you look dirty.
    Posted by maryngary


    Put the kleenex away, we'll be alright. If you want to see Perk play that bad order League Pass. Geesh! Do we need a moment of silence!
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from OneOnOne. Show OneOnOne's posts

    Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk

    In Response to Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk:
    In Response to Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk :   you make me sick, you think you understand basketball and you may, but your tongue would destroy and team you played on, easy to defeat negative people, if I was you I would let up on Perk it makes you look dirty.
    Posted by maryngary


    Bias I think you just got punked.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from BiasLewis. Show BiasLewis's posts

    Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk

    Relax people! I asking some of you to slowdown because Ainge created 3 roster spots. They aren't going to be vacant for much longer. It's an unfinished team.

    The Heat, Bulls, Lakers or Dallas created roster spots. So the strong are looking to get stronger. I'm glad Ainge created the space with backups instead of having to waive someone to create a spot for someone later.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from jrleftfoot. Show jrleftfoot's posts

    Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk

    In Response to Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk:
    In Response to Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk : Krstic is a lot tougher than you would lead people to believe, oh and yes he can actually contribute at the offensive end - but only in the Perk corner could that be considered a bad thing. Howard's offensive game has improved tremendously over the last couple of years and please go back and check the last time the Cs played Orlando - Perk was embarrassed off the floor by Howard.  Perk can no longer handled Howard one on one. Perk's defense may be missed somewhat but imagine a possession where it goes into the post and does not result in a missed layup, a turnover, bad handling of a pass, 3 second violation, missed free throws, etc. They scored 79 points in game 7 of the finals - is defense the problem?  Nope.  They have a point guard that nobody guards and cannot score and a center that is the same.  The center is gone and is being replaced by a much better offensive center and oh by the way they went the first half of the season with a much better center and a much better offense and still resulted in the second best defense in the league.
    Posted by TheDUDDER


    kRSTIC`S TOUGH WITH A CHAIR IN HIS HAND.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from RajonRondowski. Show RajonRondowski's posts

    Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk

    Yikes, can't we all just get along.

    The truth is, and it's a true truth, is that we have a new team now.   The old team just got blown up to a large extant.

    The good thing is that we're dealing with professionals.

    Let's assume that these pros will learn to become a cohesive unit relatively quickly.

    The team dynamics have changed dramatically.  What I know to be true is that Doc and his main core of veterans will raise up the play of all the new guys who are just coming aboard. 

    And Danny, no-fool Danny, knows what he's doing and picked intelligent guys able to rise to the occasion and learn to play the Celtic's style of basketball. The vets will help the new guys elevate their level of play and we will be better come playoff time.

    That's how it's supposed to work.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from RUWorthy. Show RUWorthy's posts

    Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk

    I'm just shocked as the West got weaker again.

    Green is a fine player. I don't get The Thunder at all.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from OneOnOne. Show OneOnOne's posts

    Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk

    In Response to Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk:
    Yikes, can't we all just get along. The truth is, and it's a true truth, is that we have a new team now.   The old team just got blown up to a large extant. The good thing is that we're dealing with professionals. Let's assume that these pros will learn to become a cohesive unit relatively quickly. The team dynamics have changed dramatically.  What I know to be true is that Doc and his main core of veterans will raise up the play of all the new guys who are just coming aboard.  And Danny, no-fool Danny, knows what he's doing and picked intelligent guys able to rise to the occasion and learn to play the Celtic's style of basketball. The vets will help the new guys elevate their level of play and we will be better come playoff time. That's how it's supposed to work.
    Posted by RajonRondowski


    Spot on Rajon
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from OneOnOne. Show OneOnOne's posts

    Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk

    In Response to Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk:
    I'm just shocked as the West got weaker again. Green is a fine player. I don't get The Thunder at all.
    Posted by RUWorthy


    I take it you think the C's got the best of the trade?
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Lakerman17. Show Lakerman17's posts

    Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk

    Green is a fine player. I don't get The Thunder at all.- RUWorthy

    Are you kidding??? Honestly, are you from Mars?

    http://www.nba.com/2011/news/features/fran_blinebury/02/24/thunder-future/index.html?ls=iref:nbahpt1
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from OneOnOne. Show OneOnOne's posts

    Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk

    In Response to Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk:
    In Response to Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk : you really would prefer less Ibaka and more Green (playing out of position @ PF) with Krstic on Bynum then the current Ibaka/Perk muscle up front??? Westbrook and Durant can drop 50 with the same ease Kobe drops 25. They needed interior D and Perk's 9-9, not 20 foot jumpers, slashing and a 15-5 from Green who got tooled on by other teams PF's. Nate is also an upgrade for them as a 10th man and can guard PG's and play alongside Westbrook and Maynor who guard 2's. OKC got better Celts got better as well if and only if Shaq is healthy enough to give consistant 22-26 min 13-8 games come May. win-win
    Posted by rameakap


    I think overall it will be a win win for both teams also. Perk give them toughness which they need, and Green gives us a good young role player. Kristic will do fine. And a #1
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Celtsfan4life. Show Celtsfan4life's posts

    Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk

    In Response to Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk:
    In Response to Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk : I think overall it will be a win win for both teams also. Perk give them toughness which they need, and Green gives us a good young role player. Kristic will do fine. And a #1
    Posted by OneOnOne



    Yes, in all - its a balanced trade.  You have to give up something valuable to get something valuable (quote from ChiefEddie, I think).
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from KGLove. Show KGLove's posts

    Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk

    Our bigs are Kristic and injured Shaq and JO ... great trade! ... for OKC that is... steal of the century! All OKC was missing was a center to combat the size of LA they received 2 big men... good for them hope they take the Lakers out
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from RUWorthy. Show RUWorthy's posts

    Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk

    In Response to Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk:
    In Response to Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk : I take it you think the C's got the best of the trade?
    Posted by OneOnOne


    It's a gamble by Ainge but yes. I'm a fan of Green, he's a decent player. Robinson would be covered by West when he returns?

    Perkins was offered a contract by Ainge but rejected it? I feel that if Perkins had signed the contract he'd probably still be a Celtic. Perhaps Ainge didn't think that Perkins would re-sign with the team. And that it'd be best to trade him and get some value in return.

    Would be hard emotionally for the players. But I see more of an upside for your team than a negative.


     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from RUWorthy. Show RUWorthy's posts

    Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk

    In Response to Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk:
    Worthy, fun scenario for you, taking it back to the Lakers rivalry in the 80's... Say the Celts team in '86 lost Wedman ('Quis) and had NOBODY behind Ainge/Bird (Ray/Pierce). So they trade Parish (Perk) for a talented young wing just 3-4 years into the league, lets say Jeff Malone or Dale Ellis (Green) and hope that McHale (KG) can play more 5 and Walton (Shaq) can stay healthy and play 24 mins instead of 14. So... do you trade Parish in '86 for a younger scoring wing who you feel can average 20ppg for the next 5 years nad keep Bird/McHale rested? What if the Chief had also just turned down a fair contract extension offer and was coming back from major knee surgery? What if you planned on summer of 1987 making a huge run at free agent Hakeem or Ewing (Howard) and needed both the cap space and another young star to entice the FA C to sign?
    Posted by rameakap


    As for Green I'm just a fan of his. So perhaps I'm seeing his talent though rose colored glasses. Was really shocked to see him traded from the Thunder. Not sure what this will do to the Thunders chemistry. Same can be said for Boston. But Boston have guys like KG, Allen and Pierce so they should provide the stability.

    If that was the case with Parish, I'd have made the trade. McHale could have played centre pretty well IMO.

    Perkins is no Parish though. On the surface it's a hard call. Trade Parish, or make the younger guys work harder without Wedman? Maybe ironically trading Ainge could have been a scenario in that situation as well. Trade him for a younger 2/3 and maybe throw in a draft pick or two.



     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from RUWorthy. Show RUWorthy's posts

    Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk

    In Response to Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk:
    Our bigs are Kristic and injured Shaq and JO ... great trade! ... for OKC that is... steal of the century! All OKC was missing was a center to combat the size of LA they received 2 big men... good for them hope they take the Lakers out
    Posted by KGLove


    I think Perkins looked so good as a player because he played with team mates like KG, Allen and Pierce.

    I guess we'll all see what he learned for the last couple of seasons.

    He's a good defensive player. I guess OKC may well use him in the same role. But the Thunder playing roster are not the Celtics.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from RajonRondowski. Show RajonRondowski's posts

    Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk

    In Response to Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk:

    In Response to Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk : It's a gamble by Ainge but yes. I'm a fan of Green, he's a decent player. Robinson would be covered by West when he returns? Perkins was offered a contract by Ainge but rejected it? I feel that if Perkins had signed the contract he'd probably still be a Celtic. Perhaps Ainge didn't think that Perkins would re-sign with the team. And that it'd be best to trade him and get some value in return. Would be hard emotionally for the players. But I see more of an upside for your team than a negative.

    Posted by RUWorthy


    -

    Big Perk fan me.  Big.

    Big Danny fan too.

    As much as I love Perk, I expected him to be better coming off the injury, especially being under the tuteledge of Shaq, because just watching Shaq is inspiring and should be a learning experinence for a guy like Perk.  But after 7 years he never learned to go right back up with a rebound, like McHale taught all big men, instead of bringing it down to your knees and winding up to . . . get it blocked.  And as much as I love Perk, his hands seemed to get worse this season instead of better, and I really expected Perk to be able to finish better this season, but instead, in the minutes he played, he seemed to be worse this season at finishing. 

    I think Danny saw this also, and not being an emotional fan like I, he took the prudent fiscal move and the prudent B-ball move and moved Perk to team where Perk will thrive, and we will get a much needed, versitile player who can not only back up Paul, but can play at three positions.

    DA is a better B-ball business man than I, for I could have never traded Perk, strictly for emotional reasons.

    I don't think it has anything to do with contracts, but with what Perk brought to the team and what he took away from the team. He brought great interior defense, but he took away about 10 points a game with his leaden hands, and all except Rondo recently grew reluctent to pass the ball in to a wide open Perk.

    I think now, in retrospect, that Perk played himself out of Boston: his value diminished in relation to the teams we have to beat to get to the title.  I think that if the Magic and the Lakers were the teams we considered we had to conquer to get the title, Perk would still be here, maybe, but with his lack of improvement factored in, Perk became somewhat expendable, and Danny's trading partners played right into Danny's hands.

    A simple equation in Danny's head:  Perk:  + defense, - offense:  we win games by limiting other teams scoring but we lose games for lack of offense.  It's a game where the team with the most points wins at the end, and as important as defense is, if you can't outscore your oppenent, you lose. 

    Perk became an offensive liability that negated his defensive positives.

    Now Perk is in a much better situation for himself, and the Celtics are also in a better position to win title 18.

    Hat's off to Danny.  That's why he's the Gm and I am not.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from seattlepat70. Show seattlepat70's posts

    Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk

    In Response to Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk:
    The Celtics had the 2nd best record in the NBA with Perk out.  Many on here believe we lost game 7 of the NBA Finals because Perk was injured.  NO, NO, NO. We had the 2nd best record while Perk was out because we have a deep, talented team and that does not change with trading Perk to OKC. We lost in the Finals because the only bigs we had were KG and Sheed (and Baby).  Perk would have helped but so would Shaq and/or JON and/or Kristic.  We were a solid team without Perk and will remain being a solid team. We cannot put a value on having an athletic 6'9" young SF who can score and defend.  We will continue to get the job done by committee at the C position.  I think we've gotten better around the C position today. And on realgm.com, there is speculation that Sheed is contemplating returning.  Honestly, looking at it now, this was all probably planned to play out this way.  Celtics will get banner #18.
    Posted by Petey62



    let's see...
    so you don't think perk' injury had nothing to do with game 7 loss? hmmm, i guess celtics pulling 13 fewer rebounds on that game should not have mattered.

    "I think we've gotten better around the C position today."
    boston is 29th in rebounds pulled (perk just came back). that was before giving up a 280 lb guy who pulls 8.1 rebounds on an avg of 26 mins per game for a 240 lb guy who 4.4 rebs on an avg of 22 mins per game? and you say it's okay because they ahve shaq? he pulls 5 rebs on 20 mins...and that is for half the season that he's healthy.

    but you think it's still okay because they get green...
    when does green play? is he starting with the big 4? if so, who's playing c? garnet - who does not like slamming bodies inside? all of a sudden gasol, bosh, howard are happy. or maybe he platoons with pp. yeah right.

    btw you said we bos lost game 7 because they only had garnet and sheed, and you're happy that sheed might be coming back









     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from KGLove. Show KGLove's posts

    Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk

    Pierce on Perk trade

    KG on Perk trade

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from COMMUNIST-CONTRARIAN. Show COMMUNIST-CONTRARIAN's posts

    Re: Report: The Vets aren't happy with trading Perk

    vets aren't happy? SO WHAT! fans arent happy? SO WHAT! love the fact that ainge is channeling his inner belichick! if we win which we will and do so in a more athletic, fun fashion,all these doomers will be riding the jock of danny! the first time nenad clothesline someone a la mchale, all the fans wil be on their knees washing his balls! vets are emotional like fans which has its place, but danny must be objective and go away from his emotions! great moves on his part. would have been great to get anthony parker from that cleveland trade though! idnt this his last year? 
     
Sections
Shortcuts