Rivers nixes one Perk deal...not the second one!

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from BiasLewis. Show BiasLewis's posts

    Rivers nixes one Perk deal...not the second one!

    So it's now public that Rivers nixed a deal Ainge had proposed but then agreed on the OKC deal. I guess we'll never know what the first deal was but I'm happy with this deal.

    I wondering about several things. Did Danny/Doc agree that the best deal was to move Perk or was Doc blindsided by the attempt to move Perk. It's almost as if Doc wanted A DEAL done but just wasn't happy with the first one.

    If neither is the case and Doc hasn't signed his extension I'm wondering is their a divide that's taking place between Doc and Ainge over moving Perk. Doc was always on the side of "that starting 5 never losing a series." Has all of this trickled down to Rondo and his play??
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from JayShizzle45. Show JayShizzle45's posts

    Re: Rivers nixes one Perk deal...not the second one!

    Could be....you know they say the pg emulates the coach, and Doc was a pg.  I would rather believe though that Rondo is just hurt and his coach, like he should be is covering for his injury so he can make other teams believe he is ok, the problem is  everybody has eyes and can see something is wrong...I still think at some point when the whole team starts playing well, that Doc wil give Rondo a couple of games off... Doc was very emotional about Perk, but I think Danny, watching from the side, saw a different Perk and proposed to DOc, lets get something now, "we can use Perk to land some depth for P and Ray, and lets face it, Perk is not gonna regain his form until next year and wont be here then"

    Thats how I think it went down
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from gman101019. Show gman101019's posts

    Re: Rivers nixes one Perk deal...not the second one!

    I read they had a deal in place with golden state for nate and a 1st round pick for brendan wright and they were going to flip that into another deal. That was the one doc vetoed and he told perk that, but said there might be another deal, and the other deal ended up being the green and kristic trade.

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

    Re: Rivers nixes one Perk deal...not the second one!

    where did you hear that?

    I assumed it was just a Perk for Green and maybe OKC's 1st rd pick and that was nixed... then when they uppsed it to the Clips pick and swapped Nate for Krstic it was ok'd
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from CelticFanLA. Show CelticFanLA's posts

    Re: Rivers nixes one Perk deal...not the second one!

    Here is the info on that nixed trade:

    http://www.celticsblog.com/2011/3/9/2039690/did-danny-almost-trade-for-brendan-wright
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from BiasLewis. Show BiasLewis's posts

    Re: Rivers nixes one Perk deal...not the second one!

    I'm glad we nixed the first deal. Whew!
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from jtkl. Show jtkl's posts

    Re: Rivers nixes one Perk deal...not the second one!

    In Response to Re: Rivers nixes one Perk deal...not the second one!:
    [QUOTE]I'm glad we nixed the first deal. Whew!
    Posted by BiasLewis[/QUOTE]

    Well, I think we were going to flip into a second deal. I wonder what that second deal would have been? Oh well, if Doc was against it, it probably wasn't very good. 


     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from mem17. Show mem17's posts

    Re: Rivers nixes one Perk deal...not the second one!

    I'm glad the Doc stepped in and said no to the deal with the Warriors also. Wright is having a good year and a first round draft pick from the Warriors isn't bad, but the deal with OKC is obviously much better. Good work Doc.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Rivers nixes one Perk deal...not the second one!

    We were maybe going to trade Wright, Erden and Avery for Shane Battier?

    If Perk wasn't hurt and out 3 weeks I'd have rather had him and Battier than Green/Kristic.


     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from fitz0527. Show fitz0527's posts

    Re: Rivers nixes one Perk deal...not the second one!

    In Response to Re: Rivers nixes one Perk deal...not the second one!:
    [QUOTE]We were maybe going to trade Wright, Erden and Avery for Shane Battier? If Perk wasn't hurt and out 3 weeks I'd have rather had him and Battier than Green/Kristic.
    Posted by rameakap[/QUOTE]
    How were you going to get Wright and keep Perk?
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from aciemvp. Show aciemvp's posts

    Re: Rivers nixes one Perk deal...not the second one!

    brendan wright is 6-10 and 152 pounds, is only proficient at becoming injured for long periods of time, i'm glad that trade went by the wayside.
     

Share