James Harden TRADED to Rockets

[Bogg]

Jefferson is what he is, a competent third option who could start on a champion if the other big is good at protecting the rim. However, there was a time before the C's won the title where people were up in arms about mortgaging the future and I remember you presenting him as a fraudulent stat-padder who couldn't contribute to a winning team. You weren't wrong about not being able to build a contender around Jefferson, but for a while went too far in the other direction. It's similar to how Perkins went from being a good defensive backstop to an overpaid bum when posters (wrongly) thought that trading him away cost Boston the title in 2011.

[E.H. Munro]

I didn't say he was "an overpaid bum". I said "Boston couldn't afford to extend him for cap reasons and if he hit free agency they would be locked into a Rondo/Perkins squad going forward." That was a losing hand so I have no regrets for Boston trading out of it. And not having Perkins sitting on the bench cheering certainly didn't cost Boston a title. Age/injuries did just fine for that.

He is playing like shit these days, but that's because knee injuries have sapped him of what quickness he had. He's still useful in the same way Jason Collins is, but not at the sort of money that OKC is paying him. And Jefferson absolutely was a defenseless stat padder in Boston & Minnesota, but since last season (not so coincidentally when Utah suddenly had other options at the 4/5) he's begun to not be a shitty defender, and accepted that he can't be the focal point of a team's offense.

[Bogg]

There wasn't anything for Jefferson to do in Boston or Minnesota but get stats, you know as well as I do that those teams were guaranteed to be awful no matter what Jefferson did. It was always obvious that he would be a valuable starter if paired with the right personnel. It's like Kevin Martin doing the same things now he did in Sacramento and Houston.

As far as Perkins goes, all he was (and still is) ever good at was post defense, and the knee injuries haven't robbed him of his ability to do that. OKC decided to hold onto him and trade away Harden largely because their primary in-conference challenger and one of the popular dark horses both feature two high-quality post scorers in their lineup.

As far as the 2011 Celtics go, Ainge letting Tony Allen walk over a third year on his contract(a decision that he doesn't catch enough heat for, btw) and Shaq's calf are what killed their title chances. If Tony Allen was around to keep Marquis Daniels' neck injury from setting off a panic, and Shaq and Perkins were splitting the time at center, the C's could have gotten past the Heat.

[R-Star]

Well look, another thread on potential ruin because EH is arguing with someone and refusing to admit there's any chance something he said in the past is wrong.



...Well this is new

[Bogg]

Well, let's not get personal with it. I'm way more wrong than what I'm describing all the time. I argued up and down that Corey Brewer was going to be a game-changing defender and that Taurean Green would make a nice game manager off the bench.

[E.H. Munro]

Originally Posted by Bogg

There wasn't anything for Jefferson to do in Boston or Minnesota but get stats, you know as well as I do that those teams were guaranteed to be awful no matter what Jefferson did. It was always obvious that he would be a valuable starter if paired with the right personnel. It's like Kevin Martin doing the same things now he did in Sacramento and Houston.

Yes, but he wasn't trying to win games, he demanded to be the focal point on offense, devoured large sections of the shot clock, while not playing any defense to compensate. He made them less efficient on both ends of the floor, but didn't care because he was posting his 20/10, which was all that mattered to him. Building a contender around a player like that was nigh on impossible, which is what I said. So when you have the chance to deal someone like that for a Garnett, you do it and don't think twice.

Originally Posted by Bogg

As far as Perkins goes, all he was (and still is) ever good at was post defense, and the knee injuries haven't robbed him of his ability to do that. OKC decided to hold onto him and trade away Harden largely because their primary in-conference challenger and one of the popular dark horses both feature two high-quality post scorers in their lineup.

As far as the 2011 Celtics go, Ainge letting Tony Allen walk over a third year on his contract(a decision that he doesn't catch enough heat for, btw) and Shaq's calf are what killed their title chances. If Tony Allen was around to keep Marquis Daniels' neck injury from setting off a panic, and Shaq and Perkins were splitting the time at center, the C's could have gotten past the Heat.

And at the time of the 2011 trade, both Shaq & Perkins were injured, and Perkins wasn't coming back (after 2011) because Boston wasn't (wisely) going to pay him market value. People keep glossing over that fact, but the reality is that they were missing all three centers at the time of the trade. Krstic really was as big a part of the deal as cashing in Perkins for useful future pieces. I said it at the time, I wish they could have got Harden in that deal, no matter what it took. Unfortunately the Thunder didn't budge on that. But the trade didn't change Boston's title chances, because they weren't the same team after losing Shaq.

[Bogg]

Originally Posted by E.H. Munro

Yes, but he wasn't trying to win games, he demanded to be the focal point, devoured large sections of the shot clock on offense, while not playing any defense to compensate. He made them less efficient on both ends of the floor, but didn't care because he was posting his 20/10, which was all that mattered to him. Building a contender around a player like that was nigh on impossible, which is what I said. So when you have the chance to deal someone like that for a Garnett, you do it and don't think twice.

I'm not arguing that Jefferson is a franchise player or that the Garnett trade was a mistake. What I'm saying is that it was always clear that he was going to be a good starter for years to come. I thought he'd wind up a good sidekick, turns out he's a third option, but he's still very good either way.

Originally Posted by E.H. Munro

And at the time of the 2011 trade, both Shaq & Perkins were injured, and Perkins wasn't coming back because Boston wasn't (wisely) going to pay him market value. People keep glossing over that fact, but the reality is that they were missing all three centers at the time of the trade. Krstic really was as big a part of the deal as cashing in Perkins for useful future pieces. I said it at the time, I wish they could have got Harden in that deal, no matter what it took. Unfortunately the Thunder didn't budge on that. But the trade didn't change Boston's title chances, because they weren't the same team after losing Shaq.

They wanted Krstic at the time to fill space, but he was out of the rotation by April and was more to just fill the center spot for a month and a half while guys healed than he was for minutes in the playoffs. Again, the Perkins trade didn't cost Boston a title shot because the team was already broken by the time they made it. If Perkins and Shaq were splitting the center minutes 25/20 and Tony Allen had been around to negate the Daniels injury they would have had a shot at getting past Miami(Rondo had plantar fasciitis that spring, as well, I believe). However, Perkins became a meaningless player as soon as C's fans started protesting the trade.

[E.H. Munro]

Originally Posted by Bogg

If Perkins and Shaq were splitting the center minutes 25/20 and Tony Allen had been around to negate the Daniels injury they would have had a shot at getting past Miami(Rondo had plantar fasciitis that spring, as well, I believe). However, Perkins became a meaningless player as soon as C's fans started protesting the trade.

The first part is a no brainer, and if Shaq hadn't been injured the trade probably wouldn't have happened. They would have happily played out the string had they been able to, but age & injuries (as well as some bad personnel decisions, such as letting Allen walk over a third year) removed that option. Even though Murphy's Law intervened destroying the trade's value (in retrospect Demps should have taken Boston's offer, because the Griffin/Bledsoe/Jordan Clippers were a lottery team and he would have got more to boot), there's still nothing to regret about it. Well, Fab Melo might be a source of regret, but that's about it.

And Perkins was meaningless to Boston's future (again, what I actually said) because Boston was never tying up 40% of their cap in Rondo & Perkins. And I am very happy that Boston isn't stuck with that turkey of a contract, because this team would be a 42-44 win squad with all that money tied up in Rondo/Perkins/Garnett/Pierce given the new payroll regime.

[Bogg]

Originally Posted by E.H. Munro

And Perkins was meaningless to Boston's future (again, what I actually said) because Boston was never tying up 40% of their cap in Rondo & Perkins. And I am very happy that Boston isn't stuck with that turkey of a contract, because this team would be a 42-44 win squad with all that money tied up in Rondo/Perkins/Garnett/Pierce given the new payroll regime.

.....except they're stuck paying Jeff Green more per year for an additional year, and he hasn't been any better than Perkins(setting aside the year missed for heart surgery - that wasn't his fault). You can always move a somewhat overpaid center, nobody wants that Jeff Green contract.

[E.H. Munro]

Originally Posted by Bogg

.....except they're stuck paying Jeff Green more per year for an additional year, and he hasn't been any better than Perkins(setting aside the year missed for heart surgery - that wasn't his fault). You can always move a somewhat overpaid center, nobody wants that Jeff Green contract.

I don't think that OKC is going to find any takers for that contract unless it's the standard "Shitty contract that has one more/one less year to run" sort of trade. Which wouldn't be what they were looking for. And, unfortunately, for cap reasons Boston couldn't sign Perkins to the deal OKC did. Their options were to extend the (then) current contract or let him go to free agency. Because the Thunder were under the cap for the following season, they (in essence) signed him to a new deal using cap space.

Boston offered the max of what they could in extension terms, which wasn't enough. Had Perkins reached free agency he would likely have been offered more than the 4/35, and Boston would find themselves with $21-$23 million per year tied up in Perkins & Rondo, and would have had very little help coming in, no way to fill the PF role (now that Garnett's the C) short of letting Garnett go, Pierce retire and then praying that they could find the necessary players to round out the roster. It was a losing hand and they knew it.

[Bogg]

They're stuck with $20-$23 million a year tied up in Green and Rondo, which isn't any better, and Green's had less of an impact than Perkins has. It was clear as soon as the trade was made it was a push financially for Boston, not one that freed up a ton of flexibility, despite your insistence that Green would never get a substantial contract extension. Hell, back in April of 2011 I posted this, and it still sums up how I feel regarding this argument:

The issue I have with that line of thought is that Krstic and Green are both in the last years of their respective deals. Even if you assume that Krstic is a rental and won't return, Jeff Green needs to get paid, and won't get much less than what Perk got. I really, really believe it's as simple as Ainge expecting that Shaq would get healthy.

[E.H. Munro]

Yes, but you're forgetting that with Perkins they would have $21 million tied up in the C position, with less PF depth and no backup for Pierce. Garnett just can't be the primary helpside defender anymore, it's part of being 37. Hence my comment that if they committed to Perkins they'd need Garnett to walk and Pierce to retire so that they'd have cap space to add something better than Brandon Bass as their "third star".

Also, I'm not quite certain where the Green thing is coming from, I always said that he was going to end up being an over-MLE player. Chicago just paid similar money to Taj Gibson, a backup PF that isn't much of a center and overmatched against starting PFs. My hope then was that he'd play well enough for Boston to get something out of a sign & trade. Only as it turned out he had a bad ticker which killed that hope.

[Bogg]

Depth at the four wouldn't have been much different - there isn't much of a difference between (in no particular order) Bass/Sullinger/Green and Bass/Sullinger/KG-with-a-center. Depth behind Pierce wouldn't have been that much different - Green was ineffective in 2011, missed all of last year, and has been ineffective to start off this year. They wouldn't have needed anyone to walk or retire, because Green never created cap space to bring anybody in to start with. They'd have the same roster they have now, except with Perkins replacing Darko(who just left anyway) and someone like Sam Young instead of Green.

[Bogg]

Originally Posted by E.H. Munro

Also, I'm not quite certain where the Green thing is coming from, I always said that he was going to end up being an over-MLE player. Chicago just paid similar money to Taj Gibson, a backup PF that isn't much of a center and overmatched against starting PFs. My hope then was that he'd play well enough for Boston to get something out of a sign & trade. Only as it turned out he had a bad ticker which killed that hope.

http://www.basketballforum.com/nba-f...ins-green.html

Originally Posted by E.H. Munro

I doubt that Green gets $7-$8 million/year. He's not a very good starting 4, and more of a roleplayer at the 3. Yeah, Charlie Eyebrows got the big bucks, but when you look at the teams with money to spend, most of them have bigger needs than swing forward. I expect that Green's next deal will look a lot more like Perkins' last one than his current one.

Originally Posted by E.H. Munro

One, who the hell is going to give a swing forward $8 million per? Do you really see any teams out there that desperate for a sixth man that they're willing to commit to double-MLE (in all likelihood) money to one? I sure as hell don't. Especially given the other forwards on the market, many of whom would be cheaper than that.

Originally Posted by E.H. Munro

Agree with each other? There's zero chance in Passaic, New Jersey that Green gets Perkins' money.

[E.H. Munro]

Originally Posted by Bogg

Depth at the four wouldn't have been much different - there isn't much of a difference between (in no particular order) Bass/Sullinger/Green and Bass/Sullinger/KG-with-a-center. Depth behind Pierce wouldn't have been that much different - Green was ineffective in 2011, missed all of last year, and has been ineffective to start off this year. They wouldn't have needed anyone to walk or retire, because Green never created cap space to bring anybody in to start with. They'd have the same roster they have now, except with Perkins replacing Darko(who just left anyway) and someone like Sam Young instead of Green.

It's not that Green created cap space, it's that Perkins would have tied it all up in one spot. Garnett just can't play the PF anymore and Perkins sure as heck can't. Then you need to find replacements for Green, Allen, and Terry when you have the ability to, at most, bring in two guys before having to turn around and sign vet minimum guys to round out the roster.

It was a tough spot, this is why they ended up paying that 25% premium on Green & Bass last summer. Both guys had Boston over a barrel and their agents knew it and exploited it (bound to happen in Green's case with Falk as agent). Had Green not had the heart condition it wouldn't have been an issue as they'd've dealt him last year as an expiring deal (that was the reason that they initially inked him to that 1/$9 million deal, to buy out his objections to being traded as a fifth year player). Unfortunately the new CBA prevented them from using Green in a sign & trade this past summer (because you can only sign & trade guys that were on your roster the previous year per the new CBA), so their options were literally Green/Bass or scrap heap vet min players.

This was part of my Murphy's Law observation above about the trade, because every possible thing that could go wrong with the trade did. Green had a heart problem, Dell Demps attempted to jump start the Lakers' rebuilding program, which led to the NBA forcing Paul into the Clippers instead (when Boston's offer for CP3 turned out to have been, far and away the best one), destroying the value of the Clipper's draft pick which they'd intended as a trade asset to help them reload (and so rather than packaging a $9 million expiring deal and a low lottery pick for a roster upgrade they got Fab Melo). Then the new CBA prevented them from trading Green. But all told it's still a better spot to be in than the alternative.