Any time the Celtics lose, people talk about how they shouldn’t have traded away Kendrick Perkins, despite the fact that Perkins had played just 12 games for the team this season. That’s what’s going to happen, though, when a team trades away one of their defensive cornerstones then loses 12 of their next 26 games. Even more so when said team has won a championship and been to another Finals with the cornerstone in place. It’s a natural comparison to make.

And, according to Doc Rivers, it’s also a possible money-maker for the Thunder’s new big man. From the AP:

Rivers had a good laugh over the criticism the Celtics have received for trading Kendrick Perkins to Oklahoma City. “Like I jokingly told Perk, he should renegotiate again,” Rivers said. “His value keeps increasing by each loss. It’s amazing.” Seriously, Rivers cited Boston’s record without Perkins and said the criticism over the trade is “silly.”

I’m no salary cap expert, but I’m guessing there is no “a player shall receive additional money for each loss by his old team after a trade” clause that is available to teams. Even if there is, it’ll probably be removed in the new CBA. That being said, this would be a brilliant negotiation strategy by Kendrick Perkins. Give it a shot, whoever his agent is.

As for Rivers’ “silly” comment — well, he’s the one being silly. When a team gets blasted by its competitors, like the Celtics did against the Heat, it’s so valid to question whether or not they should have traded one of their best defenders, especially considering the struggles that Jeff Green’s had since coming to Boston. Maybe it’s too early to judge this trade (it is), but it’s certainly worth talking about when a championship contender makes themselves worse on purpose.

Nonetheless, I think we can all agree that Doc Rivers is pretty good at jokes and that he would be a valuable guy to have on your side during contract negotiations. With forward thinking like his Kendrick Perkins suggestion, he’s the next Jerry Maguire.

Comments (8)

  1. Your comments assessing the trade are quite clueless. You note that Perkins was a “defender”, yet the Celtics have the best defense in the league this season with Perkins only playing 5% of the team’s minutes of the season.

    Also, has Jeff Green really struggled? He is averaging the same amount of points per minute as in OKC and is scoring more efficiently with the highest TS% of his career. Also is guarding 3′s pretty damn well.

    Is it so damn hard to do simple research?

  2. If you think Jeff Green has been a perfect fit and that the Celtics are better off with him than Kendrick Perkins, then I guess you are a big Shaquille O’Neal fan.

    Oh, and Jeff Green costs the Celtics about 10 points per 100 possessions when he’s on the court (, where as Perkins gained them a half-point per 100 (

    Want more research?

  3. Hah if there is such a clause LeBron should have been a billioniare by now :D

    Be nice guys, a player’s contibution is not always as clear black or white. Especially with just half a season played.

  4. Don’t fuck with Trey Kerby

  5. Yep. That’s when he’s playing with the backup stiffs. When he is with the Big 4, their efficiency is +10 pp100 poss. And that’s playing the 4…not his optimal position.

    The problem is that he gets way too much usage in conjunction with the Krstic and Glen Davis lineup, which hasn’t worked out. Also, he has shared a lot of minutes with Delonte West, who has been working his way back from injury and not running the offense well.

    Guy has looked good as exclusively a SF against the good teams. He did a nice job against defensive 1st teamer Ronnie Brewer, had the Spurs grasping for answers, and showed a huge mismatch in the Miami game when they tried to put Mike Miller on him.

    I appreciate you cherrypicking 82games stats and ignoring that he has a good Net PER compared to his opponent, though. We’re getting somewhere that you went to 82games.

  6. I also enjoy that you ignored the fact Boston has the best defense in the league largely without haters on the trade can successfully defend that so I’m used to it.

  7. As an OKC fan I can safely tell you that in time you will come to the point where you blame Jeff Green for everything. Like we did. And we’re doing pretty well since he was traded. But I suppose you know better than Doc who has been calling Jeff out. You do know how to look at a PER stat after all.

    Also I find it difficult to accept the logic that it’s the benches fault he has problems, and saying that his efficiency in the lineup is good when he’s with Rondo, Allen, KG and PP is a bit of a no brainer. How much does he play with all 4? Enough to make that a valid point? It also contradicts your point about him being a good small forward, because unless he’s pushing PP out of that spot when he’s on the court with the Big 4, he’s playing as an undersized PF. So if he can’t SF, where you say he plays good, when he’s on court with them, can you claim that the increased efficiency is anything to do with Green?

    I’d do my own research but… Eh.

  8. OKC’s defense has improved drastically since Perk started playing (I believe it’s 6.5 points per 100 better). Part of that is Ibaka starting, but Perk and Ibaka together (like Perk and Garnett) is terrifying.

    Stats are stats, and they are useful, but they don’t tell the whole story. Watch the Celtics play, and see how awful they are at protecting the rim. See how DeAndre Jordan and Roy Hibbert ripped them apart. See Big Z get easy tip ins. See how, even in a great win at San Antonio, the Celtics were lucky to have a big lead because Duncan just abused Big Baby (because there wasn’t anyone else who could play at that moment).

    You guys all know I’m the biggest fan of Perk there is (I bought the guy a wedding present, which he rejected, which just affirmed my admiration for the things he does), so I understand if you disregard what I say. But, I believe in “glue guys”. I also believe that a team should have an identity. I think we gave away a key glue guy, and have lost some of our identity in the process.

    And, the record without Perk isn’t very useful to me. Certainly not a reason to make the trade. They had Shaq for a lot of it. Was Ainge really so confident that Shaq would be healthy enough to start for the entire postseason? If he’s not, Ainge cannot plead ignorance on that one.

    Plus, for much of the first half of the year, the Celtics were shooting lights out. All 5 starters over 50%. You can’t count on that continuing. It’s not realistic.

    I think Ainge wanted to make a long-term business deal. The record without Perk gave him a way to sell it to the people who he knew would back up the front office regardless of what he did.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *