Perk vs. Steamer

worse

Perk is doing very good Perk like things essential to Thunders success, hes doing a very workman like job banging Bynum, always making contact on both ends. Hes not dominating, but either is Bynum, hes still one of the top 3 or 4 defensive forces in this league at his position. As much as I like KG at the 5, would still love to get a BIG next season to help the old man in the paint.

cow

Cow, 100% agree. We need a big in the paint to free up KG, and I sure hope we win #18 and KG, Ray annd Paul stick around to try for #19.

beat wrote:I don't know seems many have forgoten we friggin won the whole ball of wax with Perk and nearly won the next 2 to but for the fickle knees of KG and Perk himself

Sorry Steamer is an interesting story now but salary aside, which really to me is outside of the realms of this debate, give me Perk six days and sunday too. Perk was not making top dollar in 08 either.

What have we won with Steamer? Seriously a few regular season games is all.

What have we won with Perk? A championship is all. throw all the stats and stone hand lines, bringing the ball down lines you want, and the Techs to boot, I don't recall that they ever hurt us.

Just is no contest in my book, if we could start next season with either Perk or Steamer, give me the proven commodty, Perk

beat

just me looking back at myself

beat

He got a tech last night, so what? I think they said he has 3 techs already this playoffs combined, hes got his warts, and I don't care how much more of a speed game it may be progressing to, you still need bigs to do the neccesary grunt work, the dirty work in the paint....I think Perk can do that alot better than most and no comparison to the Steamer kid. I've seen so many screens where he stopped the guy on Durant in his tracks, freeing him, giving him plenty of space to get his shot off..... I think that would be the lost soul douchebag bully Artest, who smartly never tried to bulldoze his way through a Perk screen, he might be a bully, but hes not stupid enough to mess with Perk.

On Bynum, he has stretches where he gets his points, but is a joy to watch Perk relentlessly body him up, having his moments too, just like he used to do to Dwight Howard. Say whatever you want about his warts, hes a force of nature in that paint and a legit championship center. I think its pretty obvious what the result would be if you asked all the GM's in the league who would they take as their starting 5, Perk or Steamer?

cow

Anybody notice what a great job Perk has been doing on Tim Duncan? I heard Stephen A give his prediction before series, he picked Spurs, saying both teams had equally effective perimeter shooting, that the difference was SA had a post up presence/scorer in the low block, calling him the best in the business and that would be the difference.....well he made no regard to the Beast who is obviously one of the best post defenders in the league and him limiting Bynum one of the major factors in Thunders last series win. How could Stephen A miss that one? Gotta love that he wears no 5 paying homage to KG.

Duncan is the ideal guy for Perk to guard. Doesn't do anything fast and isn't quick. He did a good job on Bynum as well. That was partially Kobe not using his big men though in my opinion.

I thought it was funny when the Thunder started off fast at home Perkins was talking trash at the commentators. They said something about Perk channeling his anger toward them for maybe some comments they had said in previous games. Not sure if Perk had even done anything at that time or not. I think there is some validity to the poll they had one time of players that thought they were better than they are. Perk does think highly of himself.

I do miss not having him, but don't miss all those offensive pick fouls.

worcester wrote:Cow, 100% agree. We need a big in the paint to free up KG, and I sure hope we win #18 and KG, Ray annd Paul stick around to try for #19.

I wish we could keep this team, minus a couple players, get Dwight Howard. You add Howard to our team right now and no one could compete with us. Even will all the injuries we have.

cowens/oldschool wrote:Anybody notice what a great job Perk has been doing on Tim Duncan? I heard Stephen A give his prediction before series, he picked Spurs, saying both teams had equally effective perimeter shooting, that the difference was SA had a post up presence/scorer in the low block, calling him the best in the business and that would be the difference.....well he made no regard to the Beast who is obviously one of the best post defenders in the league and him limiting Bynum one of the major factors in Thunders last series win. How could Stephen A miss that one? Gotta love that he wears no 5 paying homage to KG.

Cow, I know you love Perk, and you've made your feelings on the Perk vs. Stiemsma question clear, but you're being incredibly selective here. Have you actually watched the games in this series? Perk was awful in the first two games, especially on defense, which is his strength. The Spurs exposed him on pick-and-rolls, and the commentators (both during the game and in the studio afterward) showed how he didn't commit either to show on the screen and slow down the ballhandler or drop back and cover the screener once he rolled to the hoop. Barkley said repeatedly that OKC had to change the way they played, that Perk and Ibaka couldn't play together because of how the Spurs exploited that, and that Perk was just a bad matchup for the Spurs. I agree completely. If Perk uses that criticism to fire himself up, great, but that doesn't mean the criticism wasn't justified.

The fact is, Perk hasn't had a good series against San Antonio. In game 1, Perk had only 5 points, 2 rebounds, was 1-4 from the field, and had 5 fouls. In game 2, he had 3 points, 5 rebounds, was 1-5 from the field, and had 4 turnovers. Yes, he had a better game 3, but who on the Thunder didn't, especially among the role players? Let's see how things go from here. I think this is a really good series with two really good teams, and although I missed game 3, I'd like to savor every minute of it. I think San Antonio will win, but OKC is really, really good.

OKC generally matches Ibaka on Duncan, not Perk, and Duncan's relatively poor performance in the series is more due to Duncan being off than who's guarding him. I expect we'll see an increased amount of Duncan screen-rolls with Parker, Ginobli, and the other perimeter players, and I expect that Duncan will start hitting his jumpers and being more effective rolling to the hoop like he was in the first two rounds.

As for Perk's defense on Bynum in the previous round, the biggest reason behind Bynum's poor performance in certain games is primarily Bynum, not Perk. Perk is of course a good defender and made Bynum work, but the problem was that Bynum quit working, not that Perk stopped him. Consistency of effort and maturity are Bynum's biggest issues, and that was definitely the case against a quality opponent like OKC and a quality big-man defender like Perk.

This poll was about who we thought would be a better fit for the Celtics a couple of years down the road, and it's a really interesting question because it puts the known quantity that is Perk against the potential of Steamer mixed with figuring out who would be the better fit for what the Celtics will be in the post-big 3 era. I have a solid appreciation for Perk, and I also have an appreciation for Steamer's potential. I came down on the side of Stiemsma, but I completely understand why you and others choose Perk. While the question deserves reevaluation after the playoffs, it's not about who is the better player this year. If that was the question, then the answer is Perk. But that's not the question.

Outside

Perkins had a pretty good game last nite both offensively and defensively. (7-9 fg's - 9 rebounds) Duncan adjusted by going right with a jump hook and was effective with it. Perkins in previous games had blocked Tim's move to the left a few times. Everytime I have seen Perkins in the game and Duncan is in there Perkins is matched up against him.

Its kind of funny the players that are not really being productive are the ones that Perkins typically guards but he doesn't get the credit? Magic said the other night, and it has been said many times that Perk is the best low post defender in basketball. I would say Howard was but what do I know.

I know one thing, the Western conference series is very good. Living so close to both SA and OKC, makes it even better. We have some very good ball going on in my part of the country these days. I have a friend that roomed with Mo Cheeks in college, going to see if we can maybe get some playoff tickets for the next game.

If the C's win tonight, I think we can say without hesitation we have 4 heavy weights still in the game.

For whatever its worth the top 3 post defenders are Perk, Howard and Tyson Chandler, the most physical is Perk, the way he kept banging Bynum all series was a thing of beauty that would make Paul Silas smile....he was just sticking his shoulder, his forearm right into Bynum all the time, that relentlessness eventually turned the series as Bynum with Perk pushing him off his spots and fronting him at times wasn't in the best position to get the ball in a position to score effectively, certainly not enough to carry his team.....thats what Perk does, think Thunder are glad the Beast is anchoring that defense?

Perk had a great game last night, and I'm happy for him. OKC has changed up from the first two games when Ibaka was the primary defender on Duncan to last night when it was Perk. (I didn't see game 3, so I can't comment on that.)

Perk did a physical job on Bynum overall in the second round, but I stand by my assertion that Bynum's poor performance the second half of the series was due primarily to Bynum's lack of effort. Perk is one strong dude, but Bynum is bigger, stronger, and significantly longer than Perk; the main advantages that Perk has over Bynum are lower center of gravity and resolve. Perk deserves a lot of credit for the job he did defensively, but Bynum's physical advantages over Perk are substantial, and I still believe that lack of resolve and immaturity were the primary reasons for Bynum's poor performance.

After a run of posts saying what a great series Perk's having against the Spurs and how effective he was defending Duncan, I felt compelled to point out that he in fact was awful in the first two games. It's obvious that I'm not going to change your mind about anything Perk-related. I have a lot of respect for him, he's one of the best low-post defenders in the game (if not the best), but it appears that anything less than total, unquestioning adoration for the guy is unacceptable. I'm not going to drink that Kool-Aid, and I'm not going to get into a continual back-and-forth for every game he plays in the postseason. But I don't mind throwing an occasional post out here to voice a differing opinion.

Outside

Outside

I'm not saying Perk is the perfect player and I know you know I'm not saying that, but to stay in this league, you need at least one skill you can build on that can help a team, and Perk adds a dimension that every winning team needs at some level. This whole thing started as who would you rather have right now going forward, Perk or Steamer.....to all my friends that took Steamer, and I root for the kid, you know if you were a real GM and took Steamer you'd get fired by now.....ask Magic Johnson he loves what Perk brings.

On Bynum, that was an honest opinion, but what proof do you have that Bynum is stronger? Hes definitely taller, Perk plays alot stronger, alot tougher. Perk actually also played well in game 1 vs Spurs, I don't go by stats, agreed the teams D on pick and rolls was totally off in game 2, but they made the proper adjustments and Spurs offense doesn't look anything like multifaceted attack during 20 or so game winning streak. Barkley was wrong you can play Perk and Ibaka together, and with Durant swoping in with his length and mobility, that is a fearsome defensive frontline. I'm rooting for them and they may have taken control of this series.

cow

Cow, thanks for your thoughtful response.

cowens/oldschool wrote:This whole thing started as who would you rather have right now going forward, Perk or Steamer.....to all my friends that took Steamer, and I root for the kid, you know if you were a real GM and took Steamer you'd get fired by now.....ask Magic Johnson he loves what Perk brings.

It's not as simple as you make it sound. Magic loves what Perk brings, as do you, as do I. Perk's a guy I'd like to have on my team, without question. But a GM's job is to make tough decisions about a player's performance and how a player's skillset fits with the needs of the team, both now and in the future. (I don't include salaries in our hypothetical discussion, though others may consider that as part of the criteria.)

In my opinion, Perk is topped out. He's in his 11th season, and I do not see him getting any better. He's a very good player who can reliably fill a particular role. I expect him to remain productive for a few years and then become less so over time.

Judging how much players will improve is obviously a crapshoot. Stiemsma shows flashes of promise, but there are no guarantees that he'll become anything more than a bench player. But he has very good mobility, is athletic for a guy his size, shows promise offensively, seems willing to put in the work, and has a hard-nosed, hustling attitude on the court. Early in the year, I saw him going after blocks but being out of position for the rebound, but in the later part of the season, I saw him go for the block AND get the rebound. It's a small thing, but it's a huge difference-maker and one that rookies rarely make. That's the kind of thing that makes me think he can take a big leap forward as a player.

Another factor for me is that in the post-big-3 era, I think the Celtics will need more scoring from the post. Maybe that won't be the case, but I think that the lack of scoring threat from down low in general and from the center position in particular has been a weakness that the Celtics have overcome with outstanding play from their stars, quality role players, and good offensive execution. But the chances of having stars of equal capability in the years to come seems remote to me, and the lack of post scoring will become a more glaring liability. With that in mind, Stiemsma seems the better fit to me because I think he has the capability to score 10-12 points a game. Perk is not that kind of player.

Injuries and health are, to me, basically a wash. Perk's shoulders and knee are a concern, as are Stiemsma's feet. Without detailed information about their situations, I can't use this as a factor to choose one over the other.

I think that's a reasonable case for Stiemsma. There's also a reasonable case to make for Perk. To say otherwise just isn't true. You can't compare an 11-year veteran to a rookie and say that the veteran is the only choice because he's much better now. Who would you take as the 2-guard going forward -- Ray Allen or Avery Bradley? I'd prefer to keep both, but it seems pretty clear that while Ray is a HOF pro, he's on the downswing of his career while Avery had a breakthrough season, so given a choice between the two as a player for the Celtics' future, I'd take Avery. But what if you had to make that choice at the start of this season, before Avery blossomed? That's where we are with Stiemsma. If he can improve half as much as Avery has shown, you've got yourself a gem.

cowens/oldschool wrote:On Bynum, that was an honest opinion, but what proof do you have that Bynum is stronger? Hes definitely taller, Perk plays alot stronger, alot tougher.

I have the same amount of proof that Bynum is stronger as you have that Perk is -- none but my own observations. Toughness, I don't argue with, but Bynum is one strong dude. Being in Southern California, I'll assume I've seen him play more often than you have, and I haven't seen anyone who can outmuscle him, Perk included. Perk uses his physicality to hamper Bynum and push Bynum farther out than he likes initially, but Bynum often gets better position on a repost, which shows he has the strength necessary to offset Perk. The problem with Bynum isn't that he's not physically strong enough; the problem is that he isn't mentally strong enough. Perk's mental toughness is more of a hindrance to Bynum than his physical toughness.

cowens/oldschool wrote:Perk actually also played well in game 1 vs Spurs, I don't go by stats, agreed the teams D on pick and rolls was totally off in game 2, but they made the proper adjustments and Spurs offense doesn't look anything like multifaceted attack during 20 or so game winning streak. Barkley was wrong you can play Perk and Ibaka together, and with Durant swoping in with his length and mobility, that is a fearsome defensive frontline. I'm rooting for them and they may have taken control of this series.

Sorry, I disagree about Perk's performance in games 1 and 2, and I'm not just going by stats. I watched those games, particularly game 2. It wasn't just the team's defense that was bad on pick-and-rolls; Perk's was awful. Given a choice on defense to commit one of two ways, the worst option is to not commit to either, and that's what Perk did, a lot. He is an excellent post defender, but his lack of quickness made him hesitant to commit on the perimeter, and Parker in particular exploited that to great effect. In game 4, the Thunder were much more aggressive against pick-and-rolls, and it made a big difference.

Barkley was wrong about playing Perk and Ibaka together, but he wasn't wrong that the Spurs were exploiting that lineup in games 1 and 2. OKC switches a lot on screens, and the resulting mismatches often left one of the big guys on a perimeter player, and the Spurs took advantage. OKC obviously made it work in game 4, but shooting 100% from the field is nice way to counter any defensive liabilities. It will be interesting to see if OKC is as effective with it when the big guys shoot a more typical percentage.

It's just a fabulous series. It's uncommon for a series to be good when the home team wins the first two games, and it may be that OKC's inability to win game 1 when they should've will be the difference, but OKC is such an incredible team to watch. They are so prone to runs, for or against, that they're never really in control or out of a game. When they're "on," they are like a force of nature. If they can learn to cut short other teams' runs, they can be what the Heat thought they would be -- a dominant team.

I've really admire how the Spurs have played this year with a semi-big 3 and a bunch of role players, but OKC is making the Spurs' well-oiled machine break down somewhat. Still, it took a ridiculous shooting night by the OKC bigs in game 4 (22-25 between Ibaka, Perk, and Collison) and a ridiculous one-man show by Durant in the fourth quarter to win the game. I like both teams so much. What a great series.

Outside

outside very good informative post