2013 Thunder trade ideas: Is Kevin Garnett worth pursuing?

(The 2013 NBA trade deadline is February 21st at 3PM ET. WTLC is exploring potential trade ideas that could bolster the Thunder's chances during their playoff run.)

Follow all NBA trade rumors HERE

***

What the Thunder need:

An upgrade at the center position. Kevin Garnett, even at age 36, fits the bill.

Although the likelihood is low given his penchant for either staying in Boston or heading to L.A., we still want to explore the basic feasibility of a trade that would bring a guy who could probably pass for Russell Westbrook's cantankerous old grandpa to OKC.

A KG trade is about as likely as signing Shaq to a 10 day contract, but let's take a look anyway.

The Proposal:

Trade scenario 1) Celtics trade Kevin Garnett for Kendrick Perkins, Jeremy Lamb, and at least one protected draft pick (Toronto or Dallas).

Trade scenario 2) Celtics trade Kevin Garnett for Kendrick Perkins, Perry Jones III, and Daniel Orton/DeAndre Liggins, plus one protected draft pick.

Pros:

Garnett is currently in his 17th season and averages 15.1 PPG, 7.3 RPB, 2.2 APG, and 13.2 scowls per game.

The pros are pretty clear.

KG would be a vast defense upgrade and a viable offensive option on the post (nothing against Ibaka, but he's better on the wing than he is on the post). He would solve many of the Thunder's defensive rotation issues, especially against elite teams.

You could also toss in KG's "championship experience," but I'd argue that's not as valuable given that Perk has the same thing, as the two were teammates on the Celtics' 2008 championship squad.

Cons:

The likelihood of losing Perk, Lamb, and probably the protected Toronto pick would be high in order to pry KG away from Boston, and that would be the best case scenario. Toss in the fact that KG has a no-trade clause, it means that he's much more likely to opt for the Clippers or stay in Boston, and if he WERE to consider OKC, Boston might ask for even more assets.

Another big con is an obvious one. KG has one, maybe two more years left and OKC's selling the farm to get him is a bit short sighted. The Toronto pick is too valuable an asset to give up for a short term upgrade that may not be the sure thing (if it were to happen in the first place) that some think it will be.

Giving up Perk and the Toronto pick, not to mention what else it would take (Maynor, Lamb, and maybe some additional picks), and the cost-benefit seems to greatly favor the Celtics.

What do you think?