I've been a long time member of Celtics Blog and ever since it was moved to SB Nation, it's been blocked at work so I don't get a chance to post as much as I'd like.  I do, however, read all of the stories and a lot of the comments.  I wanted to share my thoughts on this season, the future, and my perception of the diehard fan base. 

First off, I want to address a very hot and controversial topic: “The Trade”:  I was one of the few (and I guess even more so now) that liked the trade then and am still OK with it now because I understand the idea of it back then, if that makes any sense.  I disagree with the notion that the trade was a success if we hung banner 18 and a failure otherwise.  It blows my mind to read so many comments like “we threw away a guaranteed championship”.  Anybody who has watched this sport for a long time knows there are no guaranteed championships (though the 72-win Bulls might have been the closest in my lifetime).  I will touch on that more later, but back to the trade.  These are the factors that I feel pointed to the trade.  Please note, that these have been well-documented and I have no illusion that I’m breaking any ground. 

• The Celtics were at their best this year with a healthy Shaq.  The Celtics raced out to the best record in the East and Shaq was a big part of that.  Remember when Rondo was racking up all of those assists?  I think lost in the shuffle is the fact that Rondo could penetrate the lane and dump off to a guy that could finish.  How many times did/does Perk fumble the ball or take a dribble, pump-fake and wait for the defender to recover, and take a contested or blocked shot?  Shaq cleared space down there and opened up the lane more effectively than Perk.  While Shaq isn’t the positional defender that Perk is, he is a better shot blocker and rebounder.   I found it mind-boggling that pundits were asking why we would make such a major trade while we had the best record in the East.  Had they forgotten that Perk had played in only a handful of those games at the All-Star break? 

• Losing Tony Allen and Marquis Daniels changed things.  I don’t think Tony wanted to stay in Boston.  I think he wanted a longer contract and more playing time.  Looking back, now that we have Doc’s new strategy of playing reserves more in the regular season, more playing time was possible, but there is NO way that DA was giving more than a 2-year contract.  Here’s the list of players signed to more than a 2-year deal: P2 and Rondo </list>.  I've always liked Tony’s game and have disagreed with most on this board as to what he brings to the table.  Doc’s reluctance to use the bench last year in Game 7 bothered me, especially since the starters were running on empty; though it was eased knowing we were putting our best out there and they would decide who won it.  Tony’s job on Lebron and Kobe last year was severely underrated and I’m glad he got his exposure this year with the Grizzlies (even that took an injury to Rudy Gay).  His loss, combined with the unfortunate and untimely injury to Marquis put us in a tough situation.  People also seem to forget that Perk and Nate were hurt at the time of the trade, along with JO, Shaq, West, and Marquis.  The trade gave us a healthy center and a desperately-needed wing player.  The one position (yes, I know – it didn’t turn out this way) that we had some depth was at the 5, assuming the O’Neals could get healthy.  Again, I understand that putting even half of your eggs in that basket was risky at best, foolhardy at worst.  Yet, the truth is, DA was focusing on my next point.

• The emergence of the Miami Heat.  The Heat became our main measuring stick overnight.  They are who we thought they were.  “The Decision” was so huge because of the huge power shift it brought about.  I could write so much on that alone, but if you’re still with me, you’re glad that I’m not going to.  With P2 getting up there in age (understatement), DA knew that he could no longer match Lebron on both ends of the court.  The Paul from ’08 that put up 41 points and dueled Lebron in Game 7 doesn't exist anymore, and he’s not walking through that door ever again.  Pierce was ineffective offensively last year against the Cavs because of all the energy we was expending on the defensive end.  Rondo’s play (especially rebounding) combined with Lebron’s mini-meltdown allowed us to escape and move on.  Marquis also did an underrated job guarding Lebron, but with him missing, it was vital that we picked up an athletic wing player that could stretch the floor and finish on the break.  DA must have thought Green would improve defensively after quickly learning our system and trusting his teammates.  Defensively, he was poor and he was even worse on the glass.  Noted.  However, I must go back to Shaq when talking about the Heat matchup.  Miami could have still gotten away with small ball with Perk, because of his lack of offensive prowess.  On the other hand, how does Miami get away with playing Joel Anthony at the 5 with Shaq in there?  A semi-healthy Shaw would have eaten him alive to the point, I believe, where it would negate the advantage that their most effective lineup gave them.  Green fit in better in that series on paper.  Does that mean anything?  Ultimately no – but I get it. 

• Danny did not want to commit to Perk long term.  As mentioned earlier, DA did not give away multi-year deals.  He is obviously looking to 2012 – and with good reason.  With a lockout looming and a strong FA class, it takes a lot of patience to think ahead and not panic trying to throw away your future for a title that isn't guaranteed (no matter what people like to tell themselves).  I, personally, do not think Perk is worth a 4-year $35 million deal.  He was a phenomenal value for all that he brought to the table, though I never bought him as a building block for the future.  He doesn't particularly mesh well with Rondo because you are (almost) playing 3 on 5 on the offensive end.  I break it down like this: Perk was never going to be 100% healthy this year (our all-in year according to some), DA did not want to overpay for him in the future, so he might as well take a chance on somebody that he didn't mind possibly giving a long term deal.  Perk was walking, not because he didn't want to be a Celtic, but because DA wasn't going to give him what he felt he deserved.  If we don’t resign Green, people will say that we gave up our shot to win this year for nothing.  I disagree with that sentiment, mostly because of reason #3.  Would we have beat Miami with Perk?  I don’t believe we would have, but I can respect those that disagree.  We haven’t even started to talk about Chicago, either.  I thought we matched up with them better, but with or without Perk, they have a clear advantage on the boards, an unstoppable force in Rose, and play the type of defense we've been accustomed to seeing our own play.

Continue reading this post »