Why Kendrick Perkins Should Still Be the Celtics' Starting Center

I think the free agency period clouds people's judgment.

Some people get overly excited about a player that their team just signed.  They believe that that player's going to do everything their team has ever wanted or needed and then some when, in reality, that player might just be filling a specific role.

For example, look at the recent signing of Rasheed Wallace with the Boston Celtics.

Wallace was one of the big free agent names on the market this offseason and his signing took Celtics fans by storm.  He gives the Celtics another big body that they've needed for the past two years and he is extremely versatile. 

Wallace can both play down in the paint and consistently drain shots from the perimeter.  There's no question that he helps make the Boston Celtics a better team.

In fact, many fans and analysts believe that Wallace is going to start for the team and that current starting center Kendrick Perkins will be relegated to coming off the bench.

But would taking Perkins out of the starting lineup be the correct move?

Absolutely not.

The Celtics have been winning over the last two years because of their commitment to defense.  They have been one of the best defensive teams in the league since acquiring Kevin Garnett and their defense-first attitude has brought them an NBA championship.

Wallace is a good defender in the low post, but Perkins has been a beast in the paint since teaming up with Garnett.  His wide body allows him to clog up driving lanes in the paint and he constantly alters shots because of his great length.  Perkins's brute strength also makes it difficult for opposing centers to back him down to the basket.

Need proof?  Look at what the premier center in the East, Orlando's Dwight Howard, did this past postseason.  In the first round against the Sixers, Howard averaged 24 points a game while shooting over 68 percent.  In the Conference Finals against Cleveland, he averaged almost 26 points a game while shooting over 65 percent.

When Howard went up against Perk and the Celtics in the Conference Semis, he only averaged about 16 points a game and shot under 55 percent.

If defense has been the strong point for the Celtics over the last couple of seasons, their major weakness has been scoring depth.  The starting lineup hasn't been an issue since the Big Three arrived in Boston. 

With Rajon Rondo as the facilitator, Garnett, Paul Pierce, and Ray Allen have been able to get the scoring going on a nightly basis.  All the while, Perkins grabs loose balls and rebounds and occasionally gets a touch around the hoop.

But the problems begin when the starters come out.  Since the departure of James Posey, their bench has been consistently inconsistent.  Eddie House can have the off-nights that all perimeter shooters have, Tony Allen sometimes looks lost on the floor, and there hasn't been a real big man to come in when Garnett or Perkins need a blow. 

This has led to the Celtics scrambling for answers in the middle of the season (see Mikki Moore).

Wallace was brought in to help fix this problem.  He is a much better offensive player than Perkins and his versatility gives the Celtics a change of pace from Perk's low-post game.  By putting Perkins on the bench, the Celtics would just be worsening a problem that they've had no answer for over the past two postseasons.

But why would the Celtics mess with success?  They've won 78 percent of their games over the past two seasons and Perkins has been a major contributor to the team's turnaround.  It all goes back to an old saying.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Perkins hasn't done anything to warrant him being replaced in the starting lineup.  Keep him there.