PDA

View Full Version : Andrew Bynum or Kendrick Perkins right now?



Lamar Mundane
06-12-2009, 10:54 AM
My friend and I were having this discussion. He insists that right now Kendrick Perkins is better than Andrew Bynum. He says he would take Kendrick Perkins in a draft over Andrew Bynum. I say he's crazy. Bynum has been hurt, so he hasn't been playing well, and yes, maybe that makes him the dreaded "injury-prone".

But when he's been healthy, he's shown he can be an excellent offensive big man. Perkins is no different than Reggie Evans, in my opinion, and just as ugly by the way, lol.

So I thought I would bring it to outside sources (since I think he's afraid to).

You're on the clock, and you need a big man this season. Only 2 bigs out there: Perkins and Bynum. Who do you take?

rexnom
06-12-2009, 10:57 AM
At their current salaries? Perkins.

Lamar Mundane
06-12-2009, 11:09 AM
Just skill. Not salaries.

Trader Joe
06-12-2009, 11:12 AM
Even then it's not that big of a difference. Bynum is more skilled, or maybe refined is a better word, but Perkins is much stronger and I would say has more of a presence and effect on the outcome of games.

Lamar Mundane
06-12-2009, 11:17 AM
So who would you take then? If you were starting a team right now, from scratch (since the Pacers will be gone soon, lol. Joke, let's not derail this convo into that topic please). You're on the clock and Stern needs your pick.

Will Galen
06-12-2009, 11:22 AM
Bynum is the more talented player, but it depends on what a team needs.

As of this moment I think Perkins would be better for the Lakers and Bynum would be better for the Celtics since Garnett is hurt. With a healthy Garnett, I would go with Perkins for both teams.

For the Pacers I would pick Bynum since we need a post presence.

Trader Joe
06-12-2009, 11:23 AM
I mean it's a silly question to ask because neither of these guys are worthy of being the corner stone of a franchise. Who I would choose is dependent on what other players I have on my roster.

Speed
06-12-2009, 11:25 AM
I said Perkins, I like his toughness both mentally and physically and I really like his defense. Bynum still seems like a kid and a bit overwhelmed. I'm not in the group that sees Bynum as a star someday.

Bynum probably has the better potential and physical ability to be better, but I voted for Perkins workman like role player mentality.

Bynum seems soft to me.

Lamar Mundane
06-12-2009, 11:30 AM
I mean it's a silly question to ask because neither of these guys are worthy of being the corner stone of a franchise. Who I would choose is dependent on what other players I have on my roster.

It's a silly question to compare players now?

It just comes down to what you rate as more important. Would you rather have a team that has a 7'-er with offensive post skills or a guy who plays tough D and can be physical?

It's just an opinion, I'm not gonna make you actually stick with it, lol. Personally, I'll take a guy who can score in the post (when healthy) to build around. Esp since he can be a defensive presence just by his height alone, and I can get him in the gym to make him stronger.

How about this. Would you rather have Rik Smits or Kendrick Perkins as your pick? Or someone comparable to Perkins from the early 90s, can't think of anyone right now. I think we can all agree Smits wasn't a great rebounder or defender, but he could definitely score.

Trader Joe
06-12-2009, 11:33 AM
You're missing my point. It's fine to compare two players, but you're saying you have to pick one to start your team around. Well, who in their right mind would pick either one of these guys to start their team around? It's not like we're talking Lebron and Kobe here, then a poll like this makes sense.

About all that Perkins and Bynum have in common is the fact that they are both centers. Otherwise their games are incredibly different. I cannot choose between the two without knowing what the rest of the team looks like. For the Pacers, I'd probably take Bynum to get his low post scoring, but if I'm a team who already has low post scoring and could use some toughness and defense inside, then take Perkins. Neither one is so overwhelmingly talented that I would take him over the other 10 times out of 10.

Perkins is a bit of a throwback to the 90's big men, I think he compares with a lot of them. I'd say he's sort of a hybrid of the Davises.

rexnom
06-12-2009, 11:40 AM
I like Perkins because you can use him to build an Orlando-esque team. Perkins does your dirty work and you can play a guy like Granger at the 4 and, say, Dunleavy at the 3. You'd get some low post play from Perkins, just enough to keep their defenders honest, but your main scoring could come from the mismatches from your 3 and 4.

NuffSaid
06-12-2009, 11:44 AM
Perkins.

He's more polished, has a definate impact on both ends of the floor and stays healthier.

Right now, I'd say Perkins is the better player. So, based on what they've contributed in their respective series throughout the post season, I'd draft Perkis today over Andrew Bynum.

Now, this question, of course, is far different from who is the more talented player or which player has the better upside (i.e., potential). But that's NOT the question that was asked.

So, sticking straight to the point of the thread, I'd draft Perkins over Bynum TODAY based soley on their respective post-season performances.

Lamar Mundane
06-12-2009, 11:54 AM
Perkins.

He's more polished, has a definate impact on both ends of the floor and stays healthier.

Right now, I'd say Perkins is the better player. So, based on what they've contributed in their respective series throughout the post season, I'd draft Perkis today over Andrew Bynum.

Now, this question, of course, is far different from who is the more talented player or which player has the better upside (i.e., potential). But that's NOT the question that was asked.

So, sticking straight to the point of the thread, I'd draft Perkins over Bynum TODAY based soley on their respective post-season performances.

Great last two posts. Take a position and defend it with thoughtful insight. Thanks!

CableKC
06-12-2009, 12:54 PM
Oh...the question is who'd I want now? My mistake.....Perkins...he's more polished and fills a specific role that he is very good at....especially on the defensive end. As for the future...I'd go with Bynum's upside.

Unclebuck
06-12-2009, 01:16 PM
Perkins also defends Howard better than anyone I have seen. And in the eastern conference over the next 10 years being able to defend him is going to be extremely important. But Bynum has much better star potential. Keep in mind how little Bynum has actually played.


I'm being very careful what I post in this thread because in two years Bynum could be a star player and this thread might make some of the Perkins supporters look foolish. You can call me a coward

Naptown_Seth
06-12-2009, 01:24 PM
I like Perkins because you can use him to build an Orlando-esque team. Perkins does your dirty work and you can play a guy like Granger at the 4 and, say, Dunleavy at the 3. You'd get some low post play from Perkins, just enough to keep their defenders honest, but your main scoring could come from the mismatches from your 3 and 4.
This was basically my reasoning too.

Honestly Bynum is starting to look a tad soft and definitely not a very smart player.


Looking back yet again as we did following the JO-Bynum/Odom summer, while JO has blown his side of the deal simply by being washed up in injuries, had he been getting back to roughly his game it's starting to look less outrageous to have had Bynum in that package after all.

First half last year he was the next Jabbar...guess people jumped the gun just a tad too soon on that one. The Lakers would much rather have 2004 JO than Bynum/Odom currently. Of course since then they stole Gasol from the Griz and solved their JO need. But imagine no Gasol on that squad right now and having to really lean on Bynum/Odom in the low block vs Howard. Good luck with that.

PR07
06-12-2009, 02:31 PM
As much as we could use an enforcer, dirty work player like Perkins; Bynum has star potential and would give us an offensive low post presence. You have to roll the dice with the star potential in Bynum even if it looks increasingly unlikely that he'll ever be one.

idioteque
06-12-2009, 03:45 PM
I will base this off of the Pacers needs (because what Indy is saying is an excellent point) and base it off of right now, not two or three years from now.

Kendrick Perkins without the bat of an eye. The Pacers have no interior defense to speak of. We can get plenty of offense (which is really all Bynum offers at this point) from Murphy and Hibbert.

QuickRelease
06-12-2009, 05:55 PM
To me, Bynum is really getting a bum rap for not playing well on the heels of coming back from injury. I would take Bynum over Perkins, as I don't think Perkins is really all that good.