WHAT IF DOC HAD NOT VETOED THE FIRST HARDEN-PERK TRADE?

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

    WHAT IF DOC HAD NOT VETOED THE FIRST HARDEN-PERK TRADE?

    cant help but speculate on what would have happened. danny and doc have stated that there was a first trade that was supposed to have gone through with okc. doc was explaining how he and ainge work together. he confirmed that he was approached to give his take on this deal which had been agreed in principle by the 2 GMs. doc just didnt feel the celts were getting enough out of the deal and were losing one of his 21 feet of beef. when danny went back for them to add krstic or one of their centers, they refused to include harden in that deal. since both danny and doc loved jeff green from way back, they proposed that he be substituted. prestl of okc felt that could work for he wanted to pair ibaka with perk and felt that green was being played out of position at the 4 and wouldnt be as versatile for them coming off the bench. they also liked nate although he hasnt played this year. 

    had we taken the first deal and signed leon powe or even let murphy play there, we would have been much better in the playoffs. harden isnt a shut down by any stretch but his offense would have made lebron work and taken lots of pressure off the big 3. plus he was already equipped to come off the bench unlike greeen. in short term, he could have helped us a lot more plus he's under contract for more than a year. green has a better upside and will be a starter here as early as next season and should be the better overall player. PLUS there is a chance, we could re-sign nenad and he too could be a bigger contributor with a full pre-season under his belt.

    its funny the coach in doc was the one doing more long term thinking while the GM in ainge was at first more anyways more about the short-term. danny was doing a lot of long term planning. 
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from TheDUDDER. Show TheDUDDER's posts

    Re: WHAT IF DOC HAD NOT VETOED THE FIRST HARDEN-PERK TRADE?

    In Response to Re: WHAT IF DOC HAD NOT VETOED THE FIRST HARDEN-PERK TRADE?:
    [QUOTE]They had zero healthy centers at trade deadline on the roster. Erden had a bum shoulder and we all know the Shaq JO saga. It's hard to win in the NBA for a couple of months then the playoffs with no centers. Any success  on any trades was predicated on the stupid Shaq gamble that failed miserably by Ainge.
    Posted by tompenny[/QUOTE]

    It is extremely difficult to win in the NBA for an extended period... unless of course you are the Heat and the Bulls that won 6 of 8 (and would have won 8 straight) during the 90s.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from susan250. Show susan250's posts

    Re: WHAT IF DOC HAD NOT VETOED THE FIRST HARDEN-PERK TRADE?

    Harden had a great game last night and he may be a better player than Green. Since I don't have the opportunity to watch OKC often, not sure if Harden just had a great game or is indeed better than Green. 

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from notrade. Show notrade's posts

    Re: WHAT IF DOC HAD NOT VETOED THE FIRST HARDEN-PERK TRADE?

    Please Harden would never have gotten the feel for the game for Boston. He never would have given the minutes or freedom to do so. He would have been in the same boat as Green.  
     
    Harden was bad on OKC until they finally gave him the green light and the minutes this year.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Artist-Frmrly-Knwn-As-NickC1188. Show Artist-Frmrly-Knwn-As-NickC1188's posts

    Re: WHAT IF DOC HAD NOT VETOED THE FIRST HARDEN-PERK TRADE?

    Doc doesn't have that authority

    I think Ainge had it right when he said that he mostly regretted not re-signing Tony Allen

    Allen would have provided the perimeter defense and athleticism that we lost with the Marquis Daniels injury, thereby avoiding the trade.  He would have really helped against Dwayne Wade.

    Tony Allen and Kendrick Perkins gave this team an IDENTITY: tough team defense, something they lost when both were let go
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from COMMUNIST-CONTRARIAN. Show COMMUNIST-CONTRARIAN's posts

    Re: WHAT IF DOC HAD NOT VETOED THE FIRST HARDEN-PERK TRADE?

    In Response to Re: WHAT IF DOC HAD NOT VETOED THE FIRST HARDEN-PERK TRADE?:
    [QUOTE]They had zero healthy centers at trade deadline on the roster. Erden had a bum shoulder and we all know the Shaq JO saga. It's hard to win in the NBA for a couple of months then the playoffs with no centers. Any success  on any trades was predicated on the stupid Shaq gamble that failed miserably by Ainge.
    Posted by tompenny[/QUOTE]and doc. in his last interviews with weei and on espn biston, he made it clear that he too thought shaq would be back within a week at the most as they were making the trade. clearly they would not have gone thru with it this year had they known differently. 
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from COMMUNIST-CONTRARIAN. Show COMMUNIST-CONTRARIAN's posts

    Re: WHAT IF DOC HAD NOT VETOED THE FIRST HARDEN-PERK TRADE?

    In Response to Re: WHAT IF DOC HAD NOT VETOED THE FIRST HARDEN-PERK TRADE?:
    [QUOTE]Where did you see that Doc vetoed that trade?  I read/heard where the C's wanted Harden but were turned down.
    Posted by jallen5799[/QUOTE]
    he wasnt in favor of it. when ainge ran it by him, he told him so. no way ainge was going to make such a deal without being on the same page as doc first and foremost. i can guarantee you if he had imposed aany of those trades, we would not have doc around to call coach going forward. once they wouldnt do harden straight up (the numbers matched), they went to option 2. perk and green did not match. so you needed other players in there. could have gone with nate for green but no way okc was making that stinker. 

    the key was perk for them. green was disposable to them once they had the perky one for they wanted to stop other teams from scoring with ibaka at the 4. krstic was an offensive center and green a 24 yo 6'9" guy we could re-sign. we needed to score points, they needed to stop points from being scored so it worked for all sides. i listen to ainge and doc every week on weei during the season. they get very candid and raw. very loose with details. they both clearly love the hosts and the format. it just didnt work out. taking 2 life-long starters and trying to convert them to bench guys is very tough in the middle of a season esp with the complicated schemes we run. 

    stuff happens. harden would not have put us past the heat but we would have likely had a better regular season and playoff record. perhaps we dont even play the heat in the first place. what if.....
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from COMMUNIST-CONTRARIAN. Show COMMUNIST-CONTRARIAN's posts

    Re: WHAT IF DOC HAD NOT VETOED THE FIRST HARDEN-PERK TRADE?

    In Response to Re: WHAT IF DOC HAD NOT VETOED THE FIRST HARDEN-PERK TRADE?:
    [QUOTE]Doc doesn't have that authority I think Ainge had it right when he said that he mostly regretted not re-signing Tony Allen Allen would have provided the perimeter defense and athleticism that we lost with the Marquis Daniels injury, thereby avoiding the trade.  He would have really helped against Dwayne Wade. Tony Allen and Kendrick Perkins gave this team an IDENTITY: tough team defense, something they lost when both were let go
    Posted by Artist-Frmrly-Knwn-As-NickC1188[/QUOTE]in hindsight. in reality, ainge did the right thing. it really came down to quis or tony. u dont give a guy 3.5m/yr for 3 seasons to sit on the bench. quis would not have wanted to be a bench warmer. fact is quis would beaten out tony in same way the guys in memphis beat him during pre-season. quis was more than adequate. he just got a fluke injury. again, stuff happens. 

    we didnt go to wafer, y do we suppose danny would have really trusted tony and not brought in someone else anyways? tony only played last year due to quis' injury-riddled season. had he been healthy all thru 2009 season, tony would have been riding that bench like many ride paris hilton (i digress). 

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from prakash. Show prakash's posts

    Re: WHAT IF DOC HAD NOT VETOED THE FIRST HARDEN-PERK TRADE?

    In Response to Re: WHAT IF DOC HAD NOT VETOED THE FIRST HARDEN-PERK TRADE?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: WHAT IF DOC HAD NOT VETOED THE FIRST HARDEN-PERK TRADE? : he wasnt in favor of it. when ainge ran it by him, he told him so. no way ainge was going to make such a deal without being on the same page as doc first and foremost. i can guarantee you if he had imposed aany of those trades, we would not have doc around to call coach going forward. once they wouldnt do harden straight up (the numbers matched), they went to option 2. perk and green did not match. so you needed other players in there. could have gone with nate for green but no way okc was making that stinker.  the key was perk for them. green was disposable to them once they had the perky one for they wanted to stop other teams from scoring with ibaka at the 4. krstic was an offensive center and green a 24 yo 6'9" guy we could re-sign. we needed to score points, they needed to stop points from being scored so it worked for all sides. i listen to ainge and doc every week on weei during the season. they get very candid and raw. very loose with details. they both clearly love the hosts and the format. it just didnt work out. taking 2 life-long starters and trying to convert them to bench guys is very tough in the middle of a season esp with the complicated schemes we run.  stuff happens. harden would not have put us past the heat but we would have likely had a better regular season and playoff record. perhaps we dont even play the heat in the first place. what if.....
    Posted by COMMUNIST-CONTRARIAN[/QUOTE]

    It is a speculation that Doc vetoed the trade for Harden.  From what I have read, OKC backed out of the Perk-Harden discussion.  I also remember a radio conversation with Joe Lakub of the Warriors, a little after the trade deadline.  He said that they had a trade in place with Boston until Boston backed out.  He has clearly stated that he is looking for a center to maximixe David Lee's effectiveness.

    Jeff Green has never had the opportunity to play 3, his natural position.  At OKC, he was 4.  If he is givne an opportunity to figure it out, he turn out to be a very good 3.  At least I hope so.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from terrrapin. Show terrrapin's posts

    Re: WHAT IF DOC HAD NOT VETOED THE FIRST HARDEN-PERK TRADE?

    In Response to Re: WHAT IF DOC HAD NOT VETOED THE FIRST HARDEN-PERK TRADE?:
    [QUOTE]Doc doesn't have that authority I think Ainge had it right when he said that he mostly regretted not re-signing Tony Allen Allen would have provided the perimeter defense and athleticism that we lost with the Marquis Daniels injury, thereby avoiding the trade.  He would have really helped against Dwayne Wade. Tony Allen and Kendrick Perkins gave this team an IDENTITY: tough team defense, something they lost when both were let go
    Posted by Artist-Frmrly-Knwn-As-NickC1188[/QUOTE]

    Yes, and it also gave us absolutely no offense. How about Rondo, Perkins and Allen on the floor. Sorry, the Celtics needed more offense in the end of games against Miami. Their defense was just fine without them.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from COMMUNIST-CONTRARIAN. Show COMMUNIST-CONTRARIAN's posts

    Re: WHAT IF DOC HAD NOT VETOED THE FIRST HARDEN-PERK TRADE?

    In Response to Re: WHAT IF DOC HAD NOT VETOED THE FIRST HARDEN-PERK TRADE?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: WHAT IF DOC HAD NOT VETOED THE FIRST HARDEN-PERK TRADE? : It is a speculation that Doc vetoed the trade for Harden.  From what I have read, OKC backed out of the Perk-Harden discussion.  I also remember a radio conversation with Joe Lakub of the Warriors, a little after the trade deadline.  He said that they had a trade in place with Boston until Boston backed out.  He has clearly stated that he is looking for a center to maximixe David Lee's effectiveness. Jeff Green has never had the opportunity to play 3, his natural position.  At OKC, he was 4.  If he is givne an opportunity to figure it out, he turn out to be a very good 3.  At least I hope so.
    Posted by prakash[/QUOTE]did u watch the association. on the episode announcing perk's trade, rivers also talked about that first trade when stating there were other options but those got vetoed and that he didnt feel good signing off on them doc often talks as if he and danny are in parnership not some lackey or subordinate. ainge doesnt dictate to doc. he initiates but they finalize things in tandem. 
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from COMMUNIST-CONTRARIAN. Show COMMUNIST-CONTRARIAN's posts

    Re: WHAT IF DOC HAD NOT VETOED THE FIRST HARDEN-PERK TRADE?

    In Response to Re: WHAT IF DOC HAD NOT VETOED THE FIRST HARDEN-PERK TRADE?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: WHAT IF DOC HAD NOT VETOED THE FIRST HARDEN-PERK TRADE? : Yes, and it also gave us absolutely no offense. How about Rondo, Perkins and Allen on the floor. Sorry, the Celtics needed more offense in the end of games against Miami. Their defense was just fine without them.
    Posted by terrrapin[/QUOTE]wow, tony a, perky and rondont...all on the floor together. y dont u add baby at the 4 and ray/pp at the 3/2. wow, that defense will overpack the lane and send 2 guys out on pp or ray forcing them into long contested jump shots. OUCH!
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from wfdog. Show wfdog's posts

    Re: WHAT IF DOC HAD NOT VETOED THE FIRST HARDEN-PERK TRADE?

    I thought there may have been a trade with Golden State that Doc vetoed initially because I've heard Grande and ESPN folks say that OKC GM Presti was the one who vetoed the Harden deal and then substituted Green which forced the Celts to ask that Krstic be thrown in as well.

    Also, our offense seems to have gotten further away from the basket in the last couple of years, so I got to think that there is a direct correlation between the lack of rebounding and lack of scoring. We don't need scorers, just rebounders because Offensive boards = Easy, high percentage offense and as Fierce said "No rebounds, no rings!"

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Celtsfan4life. Show Celtsfan4life's posts

    Re: WHAT IF DOC HAD NOT VETOED THE FIRST HARDEN-PERK TRADE?

    Harden looks good, but then again, in many games jeff Green looked good at OKC.  Can't get overly excited about either one.  In the end, the C's didn't lose to Miami because of harden vs Green.  Reaching for straws on that one.   C's lost due to turnovers and lack of rebounds + give Miami credit because they played well, especially Lebron.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share