CelticsStrong
Celtics Basketball => Celtics Talk => Topic started by: nickagneta on December 20, 2012, 09:43:53 AM
-
When Jeff Green was on his little 5 to 6 game hot streak 10 days ago, this blog boomed with the "Green needs to start", "Time to sit Pierce", "Free Jeff Green" and al sorts of other ridiculous threads.
When I posted in those threads that Pierce was still, even at 35 years old a better all around player than Jeff Green, that Jeff Green was a passive player that would go through wild ups and downs in consistency and that Jeff Green was simply doing what Jeff Green does, which is play well for a few games and then disappear for a few, a lot of Jeff Green fans jumped all over me and some others who said the same thing.
But here we are after 25 games and Jeff Green is going through his normal roller coaster ride through the season. He started off slow and passive. He was a horrid rebounder who couldn't score and who's defense was just plain bad. Then the ball started dropping some, he played with confidence and played much better for a few games.
But that confidence breeds complacency in Jeff Green and now we see the result. Over his last five games he's been back to the passive, non-rebounding, poor shooting, bad defense Jeff Green. In that time he has shot 34% from the field, 30% from 3PT land, he didn't shoot more than one free throw in 4 of those 5 games and averaged just 8 PPG and 3 RPG in his usual 23 MPG.
$9 million a year, 4 year contracts are given out to performers that will give you a consistent, everyday, effort and production. That has never been Jeff Green's calling card. He's playing exactly like Jeff Green has always played. Its the reason OKC would give him the money he wanted and its why Danny Ainge should have given him a large, you have to earn it, one year deal and not the contract he got.
-
When Jeff Green was on his little 5 to 6 game hot streak 10 days ago, this blog boomed with the "Green needs to start", "Time to sit Pierce", "Free Jeff Green" and al sorts of other ridiculous threads.
When I posted in those threads that Pierce was still, even at 35 years old a better all around player than Jeff Green, that Jeff Green was a passive player that would go through wild ups and downs in consistency and that Jeff Green was simply doing what Jeff Green does, which is play well for a few games and then disappear for a few, a lot of Jeff Green fans jumped all over me and some others who said the same thing.
But here we are after 25 games and Jeff Green is going through his normal roller coaster ride through the season. He started off slow and passive. He was a horrid rebounder who couldn't score and who's defense was just plain bad. Then the ball started dropping some, he played with confidence and played much better for a few games.
But that confidence breeds complacency in Jeff Green and now we see the result. Over his last five games he's been back to the passive, non-rebounding, poor shooting, bad defense Jeff Green. In that time he has shot 34% from the field, 30% from 3PT land, he didn't shoot more than one free throw in 4 of those 5 games and averaged just 8 PPG and 3 RPG in his usual 23 MPG.
$9 million a year, 4 year contracts are given out to performers that will give you a consistent, everyday, effort and production. That has never been Jeff Green's calling card. He's playing exactly like Jeff Green has always played. Its the reason OKC would give him the money he wanted and its why Danny Ainge should have given him a large, you have to earn it, one year deal and not the contract he got.
And if Green said no, Danny should have let him walk?
-
Love Green as a player, I just think he is in a bad situation for his talents. At 9 mil a year for four years on any team where he could be starting and get minutes I think that is very fair. However, with the Celts he isnt going to be as productive because he isnt going to get the minutes he needs to showcase his game. Its just the type of player he is. In result, for the Celtics his contract looks bad for the role he is being asked to play.
-
When Jeff Green was on his little 5 to 6 game hot streak 10 days ago, this blog boomed with the "Green needs to start", "Time to sit Pierce", "Free Jeff Green" and al sorts of other ridiculous threads.
When I posted in those threads that Pierce was still, even at 35 years old a better all around player than Jeff Green, that Jeff Green was a passive player that would go through wild ups and downs in consistency and that Jeff Green was simply doing what Jeff Green does, which is play well for a few games and then disappear for a few, a lot of Jeff Green fans jumped all over me and some others who said the same thing.
But here we are after 25 games and Jeff Green is going through his normal roller coaster ride through the season. He started off slow and passive. He was a horrid rebounder who couldn't score and who's defense was just plain bad. Then the ball started dropping some, he played with confidence and played much better for a few games.
But that confidence breeds complacency in Jeff Green and now we see the result. Over his last five games he's been back to the passive, non-rebounding, poor shooting, bad defense Jeff Green. In that time he has shot 34% from the field, 30% from 3PT land, he didn't shoot more than one free throw in 4 of those 5 games and averaged just 8 PPG and 3 RPG in his usual 23 MPG.
$9 million a year, 4 year contracts are given out to performers that will give you a consistent, everyday, effort and production. That has never been Jeff Green's calling card. He's playing exactly like Jeff Green has always played. Its the reason OKC would give him the money he wanted and its why Danny Ainge should have given him a large, you have to earn it, one year deal and not the contract he got.
And if Green said no, Danny should have let him walk?
Absolutely.
-
When Jeff Green was on his little 5 to 6 game hot streak 10 days ago, this blog boomed with the "Green needs to start", "Time to sit Pierce", "Free Jeff Green" and al sorts of other ridiculous threads.
When I posted in those threads that Pierce was still, even at 35 years old a better all around player than Jeff Green, that Jeff Green was a passive player that would go through wild ups and downs in consistency and that Jeff Green was simply doing what Jeff Green does, which is play well for a few games and then disappear for a few, a lot of Jeff Green fans jumped all over me and some others who said the same thing.
But here we are after 25 games and Jeff Green is going through his normal roller coaster ride through the season. He started off slow and passive. He was a horrid rebounder who couldn't score and who's defense was just plain bad. Then the ball started dropping some, he played with confidence and played much better for a few games.
But that confidence breeds complacency in Jeff Green and now we see the result. Over his last five games he's been back to the passive, non-rebounding, poor shooting, bad defense Jeff Green. In that time he has shot 34% from the field, 30% from 3PT land, he didn't shoot more than one free throw in 4 of those 5 games and averaged just 8 PPG and 3 RPG in his usual 23 MPG.
$9 million a year, 4 year contracts are given out to performers that will give you a consistent, everyday, effort and production. That has never been Jeff Green's calling card. He's playing exactly like Jeff Green has always played. Its the reason OKC would give him the money he wanted and its why Danny Ainge should have given him a large, you have to earn it, one year deal and not the contract he got.
And if Green said no, Danny should have let him walk?
Absolutely.
So who's the backup sf, Joseph or Lee?
-
Although its hard to argue he has been playing awful lately again, I cannot fault the guy simply because for all of Jeff Green's inadequacies, I still believe the guy will eventually turn the corner and would be a good player someday... may not even be with the Celtics if he gets eventually traded, but this guy will someday be good. In fact I still see his ceiling to be Antawn Jamison type.
I think the problem still lies in Doc... He does not put Jeff in a position for him to succeed. First of all he does not get the minutes worthy of a 9 million contract, how will he show his worth if does not play enough, heck I have more confidence in Green than with Bass but still Doc plays Bass more than Green.
I really won't be feeling bad if Jeff gets traded, heck if he nets us Big Al or AV, I will be very happy, but Jeff should be put first in a position to succeed, He needs touches and needs his number to be called upon in days when PP plays flat and lazy.
-
When Jeff Green was on his little 5 to 6 game hot streak 10 days ago, this blog boomed with the "Green needs to start", "Time to sit Pierce", "Free Jeff Green" and al sorts of other ridiculous threads.
When I posted in those threads that Pierce was still, even at 35 years old a better all around player than Jeff Green, that Jeff Green was a passive player that would go through wild ups and downs in consistency and that Jeff Green was simply doing what Jeff Green does, which is play well for a few games and then disappear for a few, a lot of Jeff Green fans jumped all over me and some others who said the same thing.
But here we are after 25 games and Jeff Green is going through his normal roller coaster ride through the season. He started off slow and passive. He was a horrid rebounder who couldn't score and who's defense was just plain bad. Then the ball started dropping some, he played with confidence and played much better for a few games.
But that confidence breeds complacency in Jeff Green and now we see the result. Over his last five games he's been back to the passive, non-rebounding, poor shooting, bad defense Jeff Green. In that time he has shot 34% from the field, 30% from 3PT land, he didn't shoot more than one free throw in 4 of those 5 games and averaged just 8 PPG and 3 RPG in his usual 23 MPG.
$9 million a year, 4 year contracts are given out to performers that will give you a consistent, everyday, effort and production. That has never been Jeff Green's calling card. He's playing exactly like Jeff Green has always played. Its the reason OKC would give him the money he wanted and its why Danny Ainge should have given him a large, you have to earn it, one year deal and not the contract he got.
And if Green said no, Danny should have let him walk?
Absolutely.
So who's the backup sf, Joseph or Lee?
Pietrus = I think he would've come back if Green were not here. Since there were available minutes and good role for him to play.
-
Love Green as a player, I just think he is in a bad situation for his talents. At 9 mil a year for four years on any team where he could be starting and get minutes I think that is very fair. However, with the Celts he isnt going to be as productive because he isnt going to get the minutes he needs to showcase his game. Its just the type of player he is. In result, for the Celtics his contract looks bad for the role he is being asked to play.
You see, this just isn't true. His per 36 minute rates are just about identical now than when he was starting and playing 36 MPG in OKC. All more minutes do is give him proportionally the same stats he always had. And he gets those stats from being really good for stretches of games and then disappearing for stretches of games.
He is the same animal he always was and that animal isn't worth his contract or a starting job on a title contender unless he is a fourth option offensively and doesn't have to be relied upon.
-
When Jeff Green was on his little 5 to 6 game hot streak 10 days ago, this blog boomed with the "Green needs to start", "Time to sit Pierce", "Free Jeff Green" and al sorts of other ridiculous threads.
When I posted in those threads that Pierce was still, even at 35 years old a better all around player than Jeff Green, that Jeff Green was a passive player that would go through wild ups and downs in consistency and that Jeff Green was simply doing what Jeff Green does, which is play well for a few games and then disappear for a few, a lot of Jeff Green fans jumped all over me and some others who said the same thing.
But here we are after 25 games and Jeff Green is going through his normal roller coaster ride through the season. He started off slow and passive. He was a horrid rebounder who couldn't score and who's defense was just plain bad. Then the ball started dropping some, he played with confidence and played much better for a few games.
But that confidence breeds complacency in Jeff Green and now we see the result. Over his last five games he's been back to the passive, non-rebounding, poor shooting, bad defense Jeff Green. In that time he has shot 34% from the field, 30% from 3PT land, he didn't shoot more than one free throw in 4 of those 5 games and averaged just 8 PPG and 3 RPG in his usual 23 MPG.
$9 million a year, 4 year contracts are given out to performers that will give you a consistent, everyday, effort and production. That has never been Jeff Green's calling card. He's playing exactly like Jeff Green has always played. Its the reason OKC would give him the money he wanted and its why Danny Ainge should have given him a large, you have to earn it, one year deal and not the contract he got.
And if Green said no, Danny should have let him walk?
Absolutely.
So who's the backup sf, Joseph or Lee?
Honestly don't remember who was available. If the Celtics weren't committed to Jeff early on my guess is after solidifying the SG position after Ray left, back up SF would have been their next priority.
-
I refuse to make a true judgement on Green's contract until the end of this season.
For one thing to see if he can become an important part of the team...but perhaps even more importantly, to see whether he can be used in as an asset in a trade.
Because here's the thing. If they can use him, even as the salary ballast (assuming they don't need to include more value for someone to take him on), then Danny created an asset out of thin air by resigning him.
If he walked, they not only lose any chance of his production, but they also lose that salary slot.
-
jeff green is not a bad player just inconsistent so far. the contract is not justified though.
-
When Jeff Green was on his little 5 to 6 game hot streak 10 days ago, this blog boomed with the "Green needs to start", "Time to sit Pierce", "Free Jeff Green" and al sorts of other ridiculous threads.
When I posted in those threads that Pierce was still, even at 35 years old a better all around player than Jeff Green, that Jeff Green was a passive player that would go through wild ups and downs in consistency and that Jeff Green was simply doing what Jeff Green does, which is play well for a few games and then disappear for a few, a lot of Jeff Green fans jumped all over me and some others who said the same thing.
But here we are after 25 games and Jeff Green is going through his normal roller coaster ride through the season. He started off slow and passive. He was a horrid rebounder who couldn't score and who's defense was just plain bad. Then the ball started dropping some, he played with confidence and played much better for a few games.
But that confidence breeds complacency in Jeff Green and now we see the result. Over his last five games he's been back to the passive, non-rebounding, poor shooting, bad defense Jeff Green. In that time he has shot 34% from the field, 30% from 3PT land, he didn't shoot more than one free throw in 4 of those 5 games and averaged just 8 PPG and 3 RPG in his usual 23 MPG.
$9 million a year, 4 year contracts are given out to performers that will give you a consistent, everyday, effort and production. That has never been Jeff Green's calling card. He's playing exactly like Jeff Green has always played. Its the reason OKC would give him the money he wanted and its why Danny Ainge should have given him a large, you have to earn it, one year deal and not the contract he got.
And if Green said no, Danny should have let him walk?
Absolutely.
So who's the backup sf, Joseph or Lee?
Pietrus = I think he would've come back if Green were not here. Since there were available minutes and good role for him to play.
Maybe. At the time his agent made it pretty clear he didn't want to sign for the money we could offer.
-
Although its hard to argue he has been playing awful lately again, I cannot fault the guy simply because for all of Jeff Green's inadequacies, I still believe the guy will eventually turn the corner and would be a good player someday... may not even be with the Celtics if he gets eventually traded, but this guy will someday be good. In fact I still see his ceiling to be Antawn Jamison type.
I think the problem still lies in Doc... He does not put Jeff in a position for him to succeed. First of all he does not get the minutes worthy of a 9 million contract, how will he show his worth if does not play enough, heck I have more confidence in Green than with Bass but still Doc plays Bass more than Green.
I really won't be feeling bad if Jeff gets traded, heck if he nets us Big Al or AV, I will be very happy, but Jeff should be put first in a position to succeed, He needs touches and needs his number to be called upon in days when PP plays flat and lazy.
Green has had a chance to grab a greater share of play time.
I mean they started Collins last night.
-
When Jeff Green was on his little 5 to 6 game hot streak 10 days ago, this blog boomed with the "Green needs to start", "Time to sit Pierce", "Free Jeff Green" and al sorts of other ridiculous threads.
When I posted in those threads that Pierce was still, even at 35 years old a better all around player than Jeff Green, that Jeff Green was a passive player that would go through wild ups and downs in consistency and that Jeff Green was simply doing what Jeff Green does, which is play well for a few games and then disappear for a few, a lot of Jeff Green fans jumped all over me and some others who said the same thing.
But here we are after 25 games and Jeff Green is going through his normal roller coaster ride through the season. He started off slow and passive. He was a horrid rebounder who couldn't score and who's defense was just plain bad. Then the ball started dropping some, he played with confidence and played much better for a few games.
But that confidence breeds complacency in Jeff Green and now we see the result. Over his last five games he's been back to the passive, non-rebounding, poor shooting, bad defense Jeff Green. In that time he has shot 34% from the field, 30% from 3PT land, he didn't shoot more than one free throw in 4 of those 5 games and averaged just 8 PPG and 3 RPG in his usual 23 MPG.
$9 million a year, 4 year contracts are given out to performers that will give you a consistent, everyday, effort and production. That has never been Jeff Green's calling card. He's playing exactly like Jeff Green has always played. Its the reason OKC would give him the money he wanted and its why Danny Ainge should have given him a large, you have to earn it, one year deal and not the contract he got.
And if Green said no, Danny should have let him walk?
Absolutely.
So who's the backup sf, Joseph or Lee?
Honestly don't remember who was available. If the Celtics weren't committed to Jeff early on my guess is after solidifying the SG position after Ray left, back up SF would have been their next priority.
Solidifying the sg position used up the MLE and a sign and trade. You'd be limited to vet min players.
-
I think the problem still lies in Doc... He does not put Jeff in a position for him to succeed. First of all he does not get the minutes worthy of a 9 million contract
This is where I think you might be confused. Doc doesn't play players based on how much money they make. He plays them based on how well they are playing, how well they are practicing, how consistent they show themselves to be and how much effort they put into learning and comprehending the system.
Jeff Green, simply put, hasn't earned the right to be playing big minutes on this team. His salary is irrelevant to playing time. If he plays well, he gets minutes and earns his contract. If he plays poorly, he doesn't get mintes and he looks like a bad contract. That's the way it works, not the other way around.
-
When Jeff Green was on his little 5 to 6 game hot streak 10 days ago, this blog boomed with the "Green needs to start", "Time to sit Pierce", "Free Jeff Green" and al sorts of other ridiculous threads.
When I posted in those threads that Pierce was still, even at 35 years old a better all around player than Jeff Green, that Jeff Green was a passive player that would go through wild ups and downs in consistency and that Jeff Green was simply doing what Jeff Green does, which is play well for a few games and then disappear for a few, a lot of Jeff Green fans jumped all over me and some others who said the same thing.
But here we are after 25 games and Jeff Green is going through his normal roller coaster ride through the season. He started off slow and passive. He was a horrid rebounder who couldn't score and who's defense was just plain bad. Then the ball started dropping some, he played with confidence and played much better for a few games.
But that confidence breeds complacency in Jeff Green and now we see the result. Over his last five games he's been back to the passive, non-rebounding, poor shooting, bad defense Jeff Green. In that time he has shot 34% from the field, 30% from 3PT land, he didn't shoot more than one free throw in 4 of those 5 games and averaged just 8 PPG and 3 RPG in his usual 23 MPG.
$9 million a year, 4 year contracts are given out to performers that will give you a consistent, everyday, effort and production. That has never been Jeff Green's calling card. He's playing exactly like Jeff Green has always played. Its the reason OKC would give him the money he wanted and its why Danny Ainge should have given him a large, you have to earn it, one year deal and not the contract he got.
And if Green said no, Danny should have let him walk?
Absolutely.
Under "normal" circumstances, yes. But in the case where we are in all out compete now mode and we had no other options to sign a SF, I think we had no choice but to give Green almost whatever he wanted.
You can't spend $60M (committed annually for about 2-3 years) on a team with a glaring hole and be too stubborn to give up that extra $8M per year to fill that hole and solidify what management believes to be contention for a championship.
Also, Chris mentioned the salary filler to be possibly used in another deal.
-
When Jeff Green was on his little 5 to 6 game hot streak 10 days ago, this blog boomed with the "Green needs to start", "Time to sit Pierce", "Free Jeff Green" and al sorts of other ridiculous threads.
When I posted in those threads that Pierce was still, even at 35 years old a better all around player than Jeff Green, that Jeff Green was a passive player that would go through wild ups and downs in consistency and that Jeff Green was simply doing what Jeff Green does, which is play well for a few games and then disappear for a few, a lot of Jeff Green fans jumped all over me and some others who said the same thing.
But here we are after 25 games and Jeff Green is going through his normal roller coaster ride through the season. He started off slow and passive. He was a horrid rebounder who couldn't score and who's defense was just plain bad. Then the ball started dropping some, he played with confidence and played much better for a few games.
But that confidence breeds complacency in Jeff Green and now we see the result. Over his last five games he's been back to the passive, non-rebounding, poor shooting, bad defense Jeff Green. In that time he has shot 34% from the field, 30% from 3PT land, he didn't shoot more than one free throw in 4 of those 5 games and averaged just 8 PPG and 3 RPG in his usual 23 MPG.
$9 million a year, 4 year contracts are given out to performers that will give you a consistent, everyday, effort and production. That has never been Jeff Green's calling card. He's playing exactly like Jeff Green has always played. Its the reason OKC would give him the money he wanted and its why Danny Ainge should have given him a large, you have to earn it, one year deal and not the contract he got.
And if Green said no, Danny should have let him walk?
Absolutely.
So who's the backup sf, Joseph or Lee?
Pietrus = I think he would've come back if Green were not here. Since there were available minutes and good role for him to play.
Maybe. At the time his agent made it pretty clear he didn't want to sign for the money we could offer.
Yeah we didn't just have 9 million laying around to sign anyone. Pietrus at the time was not willing to play for a vet. min. deal.
-
I refuse to make a true judgement on Green's contract until the end of this season.
For one thing to see if he can become an important part of the team...but perhaps even more importantly, to see whether he can be used in as an asset in a trade.
Because here's the thing. If they can use him, even as the salary ballast (assuming they don't need to include more value for someone to take him on), then Danny created an asset out of thin air by resigning him.
If he walked, they not only lose any chance of his production, but they also lose that salary slot.
^^
Completely agree with the analysis above. Other teams valued Green enough that there were similar offers out there for him; otherwise he doesn't get this deal.
Wouldn't surprise me too much if he were traded.
-
When Jeff Green was on his little 5 to 6 game hot streak 10 days ago, this blog boomed with the "Green needs to start", "Time to sit Pierce", "Free Jeff Green" and al sorts of other ridiculous threads.
When I posted in those threads that Pierce was still, even at 35 years old a better all around player than Jeff Green, that Jeff Green was a passive player that would go through wild ups and downs in consistency and that Jeff Green was simply doing what Jeff Green does, which is play well for a few games and then disappear for a few, a lot of Jeff Green fans jumped all over me and some others who said the same thing.
But here we are after 25 games and Jeff Green is going through his normal roller coaster ride through the season. He started off slow and passive. He was a horrid rebounder who couldn't score and who's defense was just plain bad. Then the ball started dropping some, he played with confidence and played much better for a few games.
But that confidence breeds complacency in Jeff Green and now we see the result. Over his last five games he's been back to the passive, non-rebounding, poor shooting, bad defense Jeff Green. In that time he has shot 34% from the field, 30% from 3PT land, he didn't shoot more than one free throw in 4 of those 5 games and averaged just 8 PPG and 3 RPG in his usual 23 MPG.
$9 million a year, 4 year contracts are given out to performers that will give you a consistent, everyday, effort and production. That has never been Jeff Green's calling card. He's playing exactly like Jeff Green has always played. Its the reason OKC would give him the money he wanted and its why Danny Ainge should have given him a large, you have to earn it, one year deal and not the contract he got.
And if Green said no, Danny should have let him walk?
Absolutely.
So who's the backup sf, Joseph or Lee?
Honestly don't remember who was available. If the Celtics weren't committed to Jeff early on my guess is after solidifying the SG position after Ray left, back up SF would have been their next priority.
Solidifying the sg position used up the MLE and a sign and trade. You'd be limited to vet min players.
Yep that's the issue.
I refuse to make a true judgement on Green's contract until the end of this season.
For one thing to see if he can become an important part of the team...but perhaps even more importantly, to see whether he can be used in as an asset in a trade.
Because here's the thing. If they can use him, even as the salary ballast (assuming they don't need to include more value for someone to take him on), then Danny created an asset out of thin air by resigning him.
If he walked, they not only lose any chance of his production, but they also lose that salary slot.
I couldn't agree more.
I think people are going to need to realize with this team how it's constructed numbers are going to vary. In particular, I think Terry and Green will have numbers that will fluctuate quite a bit. It's going to be that way as a result of our depth and how our offense is constructed.
I'm not [dang]ing Green because of his numbers.
-
As for the issue of whether "Doc is putting him in a position to succeed and live up to his contract", I think that issue is confused. This isn't Doc's fault. There doesn't exist a position on the celtics team for Jeff Green to live up to his contract right now. I agree with many that he needs consistent minutes and role to give consistent production and "succeed". But he needs these minutes at SF, as that is his best position. Those minutes don't exist there. It doesn't matter how well he plays, those minutes can't come at the expense of Paul Pierce.
So I don't believe it's Jeff's fault nor Doc's fault - I think we just have to wait until Jeff gets the opportunity to play to his potential because that opportunity plainly doesn't exist right now.
But as I expect many to respond with, I already agree, Jeff so far has not shown me anything that makes me think he's going to live up to the contract when he does get the opportunity (or even earned that opportunity really). But things can change and I won't judge until that happens (or possibly is traded)
-
I refuse to make a true judgement on Green's contract until the end of this season.
For one thing to see if he can become an important part of the team...but perhaps even more importantly, to see whether he can be used in as an asset in a trade.
Because here's the thing. If they can use him, even as the salary ballast (assuming they don't need to include more value for someone to take him on), then Danny created an asset out of thin air by resigning him.
If he walked, they not only lose any chance of his production, but they also lose that salary slot.
And just to add on to my own post (I am coming up with this theory on the fly...and it is making me feel a heck of a lot better about the C's situation), the idea of untradable contracts for players that are still productive is quickly disappearing.
As Atlanta showed us last year, when they were able to unload a couple contracts that were at least in Green's range of overpayment (Johnson and Williams), without giving up extra value to sweeten the deal, in todays NBA, one teams trash is another teams treasure.
-
I refuse to make a true judgement on Green's contract until the end of this season.
For one thing to see if he can become an important part of the team...but perhaps even more importantly, to see whether he can be used in as an asset in a trade.
Because here's the thing. If they can use him, even as the salary ballast (assuming they don't need to include more value for someone to take him on), then Danny created an asset out of thin air by resigning him.
If he walked, they not only lose any chance of his production, but they also lose that salary slot.
And just to add on to my own post (I am coming up with this theory on the fly...and it is making me feel a heck of a lot better about the C's situation), the idea of untradable contracts for players that are still productive is quickly disappearing.
As Atlanta showed us last year, when they were able to unload a couple contracts that were at least in Green's range of overpayment (Johnson and Williams), without giving up extra value to sweeten the deal, in todays NBA, one teams trash is another teams treasure.
Somewhat of a good point. But I'm not sure if it is really "quickly disappearing" as it only applies to certain teams. Brooklyn, NYK, LAL will take on any contract because they have no spending limits outside of what is legal. Almost every other team either chooses to or is forced to exercise fiscal prudence.
That's why atlanta was able to trade away joe cool. They can afford to pay whatever price tag they want and are allowed to for star production. And I'm not really sure why the heck utah took on marvin williams. I think his 2 years is different from 4 years of jeff green though. The shortened contracts in the CBA is helping eliminate some of these previously untradeable contracts I think.
-
Love Green as a player, I just think he is in a bad situation for his talents. At 9 mil a year for four years on any team where he could be starting and get minutes I think that is very fair. However, with the Celts he isnt going to be as productive because he isnt going to get the minutes he needs to showcase his game. Its just the type of player he is. In result, for the Celtics his contract looks bad for the role he is being asked to play.
You see, this just isn't true. His per 36 minute rates are just about identical now than when he was starting and playing 36 MPG in OKC. All more minutes do is give him proportionally the same stats he always had. And he gets those stats from being really good for stretches of games and then disappearing for stretches of games.
He is the same animal he always was and that animal isn't worth his contract or a starting job on a title contender unless he is a fourth option offensively and doesn't have to be relied upon.
Never said titled contender. There are probably 15 to maybe even 20 teams that would give Green this contract and be perfectly happy with it. These teams are all lottery bound but I bet would still give Green this contract.
-
When Jeff Green was on his little 5 to 6 game hot streak 10 days ago, this blog boomed with the "Green needs to start", "Time to sit Pierce", "Free Jeff Green" and al sorts of other ridiculous threads.
When I posted in those threads that Pierce was still, even at 35 years old a better all around player than Jeff Green, that Jeff Green was a passive player that would go through wild ups and downs in consistency and that Jeff Green was simply doing what Jeff Green does, which is play well for a few games and then disappear for a few, a lot of Jeff Green fans jumped all over me and some others who said the same thing.
But here we are after 25 games and Jeff Green is going through his normal roller coaster ride through the season. He started off slow and passive. He was a horrid rebounder who couldn't score and who's defense was just plain bad. Then the ball started dropping some, he played with confidence and played much better for a few games.
But that confidence breeds complacency in Jeff Green and now we see the result. Over his last five games he's been back to the passive, non-rebounding, poor shooting, bad defense Jeff Green. In that time he has shot 34% from the field, 30% from 3PT land, he didn't shoot more than one free throw in 4 of those 5 games and averaged just 8 PPG and 3 RPG in his usual 23 MPG.
$9 million a year, 4 year contracts are given out to performers that will give you a consistent, everyday, effort and production. That has never been Jeff Green's calling card. He's playing exactly like Jeff Green has always played. Its the reason OKC would give him the money he wanted and its why Danny Ainge should have given him a large, you have to earn it, one year deal and not the contract he got.
And if Green said no, Danny should have let him walk?
Sure. I agree it's a little early to cast Green off, but what's changed from his history and reputation?
It's hard for me to understand how -- to date -- this team would really be any different if the Cs had passed on Green, drafted Jeff Taylor instead of Melo, and signed Pietrus for a year as insurance.
Maybe Green'll turn a corner. Maybe he'll learn how to defend, or rebound, or both (doubtful). Maybe this team will start playing much better before an injury happens, and Green steps in and steps up. But until then? Would anyone here really care if Green were on another team doing what he's doing now? No.
Soft is a disease. I hate that he (and Bass) are letting it sink in with this team. Hate it.
-
Green is nothing more then another asset. I highly doubt he is a part of the future core of the celtics.
-
Guys Pietrus was flat out awful last year and he missed one third of the season. He was also a guy who im pretty sure shot 80% of his fgs from 3 at a terrible rate. Maybe there we're other people available but mentioning Pietrus's name basically says that you weren't attempting to reload for a championship.
As for green its a tough situation. This is Pierce's city and team and has been for a while now. He is still an all star and still gets the benefit of the doubt even when he plays bad. He's built a trust with Doc over the past decade. Green would have to over the top play better than Pierce to get more minutes than him otherwise I think he is in the 20 min range in which case he needs to make quick work to impress or add to the team.
Id like to get him minutes at the PF position especially when the matchups allow. He's the same rebounder as Bass and probably a better defender than Sully at the position. He should be able to take better advantage offensively at the position as well.
I know people like to shout that he can't play pf but we need to put talent on the floor in some shape or form. We've been trying too hard to play people at their natural position instead of rolling the ball out there every once.in a while. Its not like he's even been given a chance at PF since he's been here (again not saying he should be playing there primarily) and it's not like he would be playing center or PG. There's definitely some wiggle room at the PF spot in this league
-
Guys Pietrus was flat out awful last year and he missed one third of the season. He was also a guy who im pretty sure shot 80% of his fgs from 3 at a terrible rate. Maybe there we're other people available but mentioning Pietrus's name basically says that you weren't attempting to reload for a championship.
As for green its a tough situation. This is Pierce's city and team and has been for a while now. He is still an all star and still gets the benefit of the doubt even when he plays bad. He's built a trust with Doc over the past decade. Green would have to over the top play better than Pierce to get more minutes than him otherwise I think he is in the 20 min range in which case he needs to make quick work to impress or add to the team.
Id like to get him minutes at the PF position especially when the matchups allow. He's the same rebounder as Bass and probably a better defender than Sully at the position. He should be able to take better advantage offensively at the position as well.
I know people like to shout that he can't play pf but we need to put talent on the floor in some shape or form. We've been trying too hard to play people at their natural position instead of rolling the ball out there every once.in a while. Its not like he's even been given a chance at PF since he's been here (again not saying he should be playing there primarily) and it's not like he would be playing center or PG. There's definitely some wiggle room at the PF spot in this league
I called Pietrus "insurance". And his defense is better than Green's. Period.
-
I don't get why some still feel like he has a corner to turn. He's providing the same rate of production he did at OKC. More minutes will mean more raw numbers but not necessarily more quality. He's a veteran with a lot of games and minutes to judge him by. He's an average at best player, if you're being generous. I don't see one aspect of his game that leads me to believe he's even a fringe all-star in the future. It's nice that he looks the part, tall with an athletic body but his skill level and motor leave something to be desired.
Doc absurdly said he was going to have Green play point forward a few weeks back. I wish Green had more of that mentality which he had at Georgetown. One of Green's biggest weaknesses is his one-dimensionality. If his shots aren't falling, he provides nearly zero production. If you can pass, you don't need to be on to make some kind of impact.
-
One big reason why Green tends to stand in the corner a lot, which is not necessarily a bad thing since he's hit the corner threes at a very good rate, is that he's not a pick and roll ball handler. His offensive game besides spot up shooting revolves around isos and the lowpost. Not only is this team not built around clearing out for Green repeatedly but the production they get from doing so isn't all that great.
There has to be a way to get Green easier looks. When he's given the ball in the post or on the wing and asked to create, the shots are almost always difficult and highly contested. He doesn't have the crafty ballhandling or quickness to create separation.
I'd like to see Green play more alongside Pierce on the wing. Maybe it wouldn't benefit Green individually but Green's size would force teams into a difficult decision of who to put their smaller defender on. If it's on Green, he'd be in better position to use his post game.
Regardless of who guards Green, a tall or small defender, he's not going to create a lot of horizontal separation. He even struggled to do that against Hawes. Maybe another way is to create vertical separation by trying to get him matched up against shorter guys. He would have more room when he gets off lowpost shots and pull up jumpers.
-
We should have never have signed him without seeing him play. That was silly. He is not a carry team guy.
-
We should have never have signed him without seeing him play. That was silly. He is not a carry team guy.
Huh? He had seen him play for what? 4 years?
And honestly, if he were a carry team guy, he would have demanded a lot more than $9 million per year.
-
Never said titled contender. There are probably 15 to maybe even 20 teams that would give Green this contract and be perfectly happy with it. These teams are all lottery bound but I bet would still give Green this contract.
I'm sorry, what? I highly doubt there was 1 other team willing to give him that deal. He's actually playing worse than he was on OKC - PER and WS/48 are at a career low. Yes, he's playing less minutes, but it's not like he's being efficient in the minutes he's playing.
-
Never said titled contender. There are probably 15 to maybe even 20 teams that would give Green this contract and be perfectly happy with it. These teams are all lottery bound but I bet would still give Green this contract.
I'm sorry, what? I highly doubt there was 1 other team willing to give him that deal. He's actually playing worse than he was on OKC - PER and WS/48 are at a career low. Yes, he's playing less minutes, but it's not like he's being efficient in the minutes he's playing.
Hes not a guy who can come off the bench and score and add instant offense. I dont think you can compare his 48 per minutes in OKC vs his 48 per minute off the bench in Boston. His role was completely different on both teams. If we didnt sign him, a number of teams would have given him this deal to be their starting SF.
-
Never said titled contender. There are probably 15 to maybe even 20 teams that would give Green this contract and be perfectly happy with it. These teams are all lottery bound but I bet would still give Green this contract.
I'm sorry, what? I highly doubt there was 1 other team willing to give him that deal. He's actually playing worse than he was on OKC - PER and WS/48 are at a career low. Yes, he's playing less minutes, but it's not like he's being efficient in the minutes he's playing.
I highly doubt that no other team would give Green either the same or almost the same deal. A similar bid from another team is the only rational reason Danny would offer him such a contract.
-
There's been zero indication in Green's career that he's going to be more productive on a per minute basis if he plays more minutes.
As mentioned, his per36 production has been remarkably similar over his career, and remarkably mediocre too. A well paid 6th man has to come on and do damage in his minutes, like Crawford is doing for the Clippers, or JET did for many of his years in Dallas.
DA could have gotten any bargain basement scrub to score 9 points on 43% shooting in 22 minutes, grab a rebound every 7.5 minutes, get an assist every other game, and play mediocre defense.
Green has been a total disaster as a 6th man for the first quarter of the season. At $4m a year, it's not as big a deal as at $9m a year. What concerns me the most is that he isn't willing to play hard for any stretch of time whatsoever. Jeff Green has a Tourette's Syndrome motor. Once in a while, he'll burst out with something loud and memorable, and the rest of the time he just floats through the game.
I can't wait for January 15th, and hope there's an NBA GM who wants to pay $9m a year the next 3 1/2 years for something he can get for three or four million.
-
Never said titled contender. There are probably 15 to maybe even 20 teams that would give Green this contract and be perfectly happy with it. These teams are all lottery bound but I bet would still give Green this contract.
I'm sorry, what? I highly doubt there was 1 other team willing to give him that deal. He's actually playing worse than he was on OKC - PER and WS/48 are at a career low. Yes, he's playing less minutes, but it's not like he's being efficient in the minutes he's playing.
I highly doubt that no other team would give Green either the same or almost the same deal. A similar bid from another team is the only rational reason Danny would offer him such a contract.
could be. but I remember reading the below article and thinking, 'this sounds like an agent trying to drum up interest'. "12 to 14" teams is sales talk.... a crock.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/sam_amick/06/16/jeff.green/index.html
meanwhile, i never found a single count of a team being acknowledged as pursuing Green, which is pretty darm strange in the current world of media. anyway the celtics should be capable of discerning when a players actual value has been exceeded by bidding and desperation. you just pass.
-
Just to add perspective, Rondo only makes 2 million a year more than Green. Win some, lose some.
-
he's probably in need of a good chunk of games. I mean we are what, 27 games in?
I don't like making more excuses for him but I think we owe him more than 30 games to judge his contract.
-
he's probably in need of a good chunk of games. I mean we are what, 27 games in?
I don't like making more excuses for him but I think we owe him more than 30 games to judge his contract.
But when his per minute production is almost the exact same production now as it has been his entire career, I think it fair to expect the exact same production for all four years of the contract.
More minutes are only going to mean proportional production because he hasn't shown any drop off in per minute production when he had his minutes go from starter minutes to bench minutes.
His per minute production isn't worth $9 million a year. Expecting his per minute production to change and for him to become something he has never shown himself to be is illogical.
As Chris brought up, and this was something I thought as soon as he was signed, Ainge signed him to a $9 million slot because he thought he could use a $9 million slot to trade regardless of how good the player playing in that slot was playing. So ultimately it might be a good contract because it brings in someone of better quality but that is still to be determined. As of now, its a bad contract.
-
It may very well be a bad contract with Green on the Celtics roster, much as Perkins' deal is atrocious for Oklahoma City.
But I am with Chris here - it is too premature to make a blanket statement on this Green contract until we find out whether he stays or goes.
-
As Chris brought up, and this was something I thought as soon as he was signed, Ainge signed him to a $9 million slot because he thought he could use a $9 million slot to trade regardless of how good the player playing in that slot was playing. So ultimately it might be a good contract because it brings in someone of better quality but that is still to be determined. As of now, its a bad contract.
I thought the same thing about a salary "slot". If so, I think he's not meant to be a trade asset before the summer of 2014.
-
We should have never have signed him without seeing him play. That was silly. He is not a carry team guy.
Huh? He had seen him play for what? 4 years?
And honestly, if he were a carry team guy, he would have demanded a lot more than $9 million per year.
Wait, there are guys who can carry teams that sign for 9 mil per over 4 years? I'd love me one or two of these.
Sadly, that doesn't happen. 9 million likely get you someone who contributes as much as Green did in his days as a starter. The problem is the current lineup isn't constructed in a way in which he can get 30 minutes a night, which means there will be pepetual talk about him underperforming.
-
A few people mentioned Green turning a corner. Didn't he turn a corner 3 weeks ago? Then after 4 games or so he turned another corner and ended up exactly where he started.
The consistent minutes excuse is ridiculous too. Do you think Lebron would suck if he only played one quarter? Would Pierce or KG suck if they only played 20min? Thats crazy. If anything, Green should be able to play with more energy and coast way less.
-
WHY do so many people care so much about what Green got paid??? If we was making $7M, would that be better? What does that extra $2-3M get us?
Danny and the owners are so much better at running an NBA team than the members of Celticsblog.
-
WHY do so many people care so much about what Green got paid??? If we was making $7M, would that be better? What does that extra $2-3M get us?
Danny and the owners are so much better at running an NBA team than the members of Celticsblog.
Are you trying to assert that in commenting about a league with a salary cap and restrictive trade rules, no one should focus on what individual players have for contracts?
Let's trade for Biedrins. So what he's going to "earn" $21m the next two years. How about Amare and his uninsured $63m over the next three seasons?
It absolutely does matter that Player A makes $9m x 4 years when you can get the same production from a vetmin making 1/8th that with no long term commitment. It matters that his contract isn't $7m per, which would be a more trade-able slot for his production.
-
it was a bad signing at the time bc:
1- he played like crap for the 1/2 year we had him after the trade
2- missed an entire season with a heart issue
3- the amount of yrs
I will hold final judgement at the end of the season, but thus far, my initial feelings still hold true for me that the signing sucked.
-
I think the sooner we get out from underneath his contract the better. Green is getting paid for what he could be instead of what he is. The longer we hold on to Green the harder he will be to move.
-
Green should have received a one to two year contract. Hopefully he can play well for a couple months and get traded for Gortat or something.
-
Do you think our opinion and his performance would change if he played starter minutes? Not that I'm advocating for that but he, as well as many others on this team just seem to defer most of the time.
-
Do you think our opinion and his performance would change if he played starter minutes? Not that I'm advocating for that but he, as well as many others on this team just seem to defer most of the time.
He doesnt seem to defer in my opinion. He shoots when he should shoot and drives when he should drive. More minutes would equal more of the same. The real problem is that he doesnt contribute in any other areas.
-
Do you think our opinion and his performance would change if he played starter minutes? Not that I'm advocating for that but he, as well as many others on this team just seem to defer most of the time.
He doesnt seem to defer in my opinion. He shoots when he should shoot and drives when he should drive. More minutes would equal more of the same. The real problem is that he doesnt contribute in any other areas.
Um, he doesn't defer. When he doesn't get shots, that's because someone (typically Rondo) is trying to break the floor pounding the ball.
Green has been great when they've kept him involved in the offence -- and that doesn't mean getting him the ball for an occasional corner three.
-
Here's the thing: the $36 million Jeff Green is making over the next four years is not your money.
So why does it matter if he's overpaid? The only cost that matters from our perspective is the opportunity cost.
That is what really matters -- what move could the Celtics have made instead of signing Jeff Green that would have been better?
I'm not really seeing it. Pietrus or Kris Joseph would not have been better options at backup SF. The 8.5 million on the cap this year is not money that could have gone to anybody else. Nor is it likely to impede us from signing guys over the next few years -- though it might force us to use the tax-payer MLE (3 million) instead of the full MLE (5 million). Big whoop.
The fact is, signing Jeff didn't prevent us from signing a {b]more valuable[/b] guy at his position, or any other position.
If anything, we should be complaining about Jason Terry, because he has underperformed and he got the MLE, which we could theoretically have used on somebody else who would have been more productive (e.g. Carl Landry or Jamal Crawford).
-
I'd love to have Landry.
-
Being over the luxury tax threshold also stops Boston from being able to make sign and trades. That new rule comes into force next summer.
No sign and trades + mini-MLE = Minimal opportunities to upgrade team via Free Agency
-
When Jeff Green was on his little 5 to 6 game hot streak 10 days ago, this blog boomed with the "Green needs to start", "Time to sit Pierce", "Free Jeff Green" and al sorts of other ridiculous threads.
When I posted in those threads that Pierce was still, even at 35 years old a better all around player than Jeff Green, that Jeff Green was a passive player that would go through wild ups and downs in consistency and that Jeff Green was simply doing what Jeff Green does, which is play well for a few games and then disappear for a few, a lot of Jeff Green fans jumped all over me and some others who said the same thing.
But here we are after 25 games and Jeff Green is going through his normal roller coaster ride through the season. He started off slow and passive. He was a horrid rebounder who couldn't score and who's defense was just plain bad. Then the ball started dropping some, he played with confidence and played much better for a few games.
But that confidence breeds complacency in Jeff Green and now we see the result. Over his last five games he's been back to the passive, non-rebounding, poor shooting, bad defense Jeff Green. In that time he has shot 34% from the field, 30% from 3PT land, he didn't shoot more than one free throw in 4 of those 5 games and averaged just 8 PPG and 3 RPG in his usual 23 MPG.
$9 million a year, 4 year contracts are given out to performers that will give you a consistent, everyday, effort and production. That has never been Jeff Green's calling card. He's playing exactly like Jeff Green has always played. Its the reason OKC would give him the money he wanted and its why Danny Ainge should have given him a large, you have to earn it, one year deal and not the contract he got.
And if Green said no, Danny should have let him walk?
Absolutely.
So who's the backup sf, Joseph or Lee?
Honestly don't remember who was available. If the Celtics weren't committed to Jeff early on my guess is after solidifying the SG position after Ray left, back up SF would have been their next priority.
If you remember our cap position at the time it was either get jeff green with his rights or sign some minimum level floopsy. Pietrus wanted more than minimum level money. I would rather Jeff green than some flog that 29 other teams have rejected. This signing was the right move to try and be competitive at small forward this year.
-
I would rather Jeff green than some flog that 29 other teams have rejected.
There are probably at least a few people on this board who would have preferred current d-leaguer Chris Douglas-Roberts. There are some D-League bigs I would have preferred over Darko.
-
I would rather Jeff green than some flog that 29 other teams have rejected.
There are probably at least a few people on this board who would have preferred current d-leaguer Chris Douglas-Roberts. There are some D-League bigs I would have preferred over Darko.
Elaborate how CDR is a better option than green with career numbers of 8/2/1 while jeff has career numbers of 14/5/2, both having not played in the NBA last year, one due to a heart ailment, and one due to being just all round not very good.
-
I would rather Jeff green than some flog that 29 other teams have rejected.
There are probably at least a few people on this board who would have preferred current d-leaguer Chris Douglas-Roberts. There are some D-League bigs I would have preferred over Darko.
Elaborate how CDR is a better option than green with career numbers of 8/2/1 while jeff has career numbers of 14/5/2, both having not played in the NBA last year, one due to a heart ailment, and one due to being just all round not very good.
I wouldn't prefer CDR, but I expect there are some people who would under the theory that "X is a bum, therefore anybody else must be better".
-
He's certainly a frustrating player to watch. Hopefully another gm will make Ainge's mistake and overvalue him and take him off our hands.
-
When Jeff Green was on his little 5 to 6 game hot streak 10 days ago, this blog boomed with the "Green needs to start", "Time to sit Pierce", "Free Jeff Green" and al sorts of other ridiculous threads.
When I posted in those threads that Pierce was still, even at 35 years old a better all around player than Jeff Green, that Jeff Green was a passive player that would go through wild ups and downs in consistency and that Jeff Green was simply doing what Jeff Green does, which is play well for a few games and then disappear for a few, a lot of Jeff Green fans jumped all over me and some others who said the same thing.
But here we are after 25 games and Jeff Green is going through his normal roller coaster ride through the season. He started off slow and passive. He was a horrid rebounder who couldn't score and who's defense was just plain bad. Then the ball started dropping some, he played with confidence and played much better for a few games.
But that confidence breeds complacency in Jeff Green and now we see the result. Over his last five games he's been back to the passive, non-rebounding, poor shooting, bad defense Jeff Green. In that time he has shot 34% from the field, 30% from 3PT land, he didn't shoot more than one free throw in 4 of those 5 games and averaged just 8 PPG and 3 RPG in his usual 23 MPG.
$9 million a year, 4 year contracts are given out to performers that will give you a consistent, everyday, effort and production. That has never been Jeff Green's calling card. He's playing exactly like Jeff Green has always played. Its the reason OKC would give him the money he wanted and its why Danny Ainge should have given him a large, you have to earn it, one year deal and not the contract he got.
And if Green said no, Danny should have let him walk?
Absolutely.
So who's the backup sf, Joseph or Lee?
Honestly don't remember who was available. If the Celtics weren't committed to Jeff early on my guess is after solidifying the SG position after Ray left, back up SF would have been their next priority.
If you remember our cap position at the time it was either get jeff green with his rights or sign some minimum level floopsy. Pietrus wanted more than minimum level money. I would rather Jeff green than some flog that 29 other teams have rejected. This signing was the right move to try and be competitive at small forward this year.
A $40 mil back-up for PP?
This is what dumb teams do. And why they stink in many cases for decades, not years. Because typically, smart organizations don't ever go where you just went. You sign impact players to big deals, and role players to intelligent short reasonable contracts.... because they're replaceable.
And if you're not really good, let it go -- you're more likely to get good by being bad then you are by being mediocre.
Only All-stars are worth >mid-level. No Bargnanis. No Ty Thomases. No Villenuevas. For Pete's sake, Barbosa is a better basketball player than Green.
I challenge anyone to suggest what they feel the Celtics would be missing without Green. If the only answer is "a back-up to Pierce", or even worse "a SF once Pierce heads towards retirement", then you know how bad the signing is.
-
When Jeff Green was on his little 5 to 6 game hot streak 10 days ago, this blog boomed with the "Green needs to start", "Time to sit Pierce", "Free Jeff Green" and al sorts of other ridiculous threads.
When I posted in those threads that Pierce was still, even at 35 years old a better all around player than Jeff Green, that Jeff Green was a passive player that would go through wild ups and downs in consistency and that Jeff Green was simply doing what Jeff Green does, which is play well for a few games and then disappear for a few, a lot of Jeff Green fans jumped all over me and some others who said the same thing.
But here we are after 25 games and Jeff Green is going through his normal roller coaster ride through the season. He started off slow and passive. He was a horrid rebounder who couldn't score and who's defense was just plain bad. Then the ball started dropping some, he played with confidence and played much better for a few games.
But that confidence breeds complacency in Jeff Green and now we see the result. Over his last five games he's been back to the passive, non-rebounding, poor shooting, bad defense Jeff Green. In that time he has shot 34% from the field, 30% from 3PT land, he didn't shoot more than one free throw in 4 of those 5 games and averaged just 8 PPG and 3 RPG in his usual 23 MPG.
$9 million a year, 4 year contracts are given out to performers that will give you a consistent, everyday, effort and production. That has never been Jeff Green's calling card. He's playing exactly like Jeff Green has always played. Its the reason OKC would give him the money he wanted and its why Danny Ainge should have given him a large, you have to earn it, one year deal and not the contract he got.
And if Green said no, Danny should have let him walk?
Absolutely.
So who's the backup sf, Joseph or Lee?
Honestly don't remember who was available. If the Celtics weren't committed to Jeff early on my guess is after solidifying the SG position after Ray left, back up SF would have been their next priority.
If you remember our cap position at the time it was either get jeff green with his rights or sign some minimum level floopsy. Pietrus wanted more than minimum level money. I would rather Jeff green than some flog that 29 other teams have rejected. This signing was the right move to try and be competitive at small forward this year.
I would rather have Marquis Daniels at next to nothing than Jeff Green at $9 million a year. Same minutes, almost same stats. $8.1 million a year less.
-
Being over the luxury tax threshold also stops Boston from being able to make sign and trades. That new rule comes into force next summer.
Can't be over the apron after the trade. There's plenty of room still for a sign and trade to be made as it stands. So it's not about being tax payers, but being 4 million above the tax line, since otherwise it would be a circumvention of the hard cap they have set in place.
No sign and trades + mini-MLE = Minimal opportunities to upgrade team via Free Agency
I think there's still an opportunity we have the Full MLE next year. We'll have to see how the luxury tax line plays out next season.
That said, at the very least, Jeff Green is valued as an MLE player so for all intents and purposes, he's the would be MLE acquisition.
He's still young, and a very tradeable contract with some heft, something that is always needed to facilitate big trades when needed.
The "minimal" opportunities to upgrade the team next year and on I think are very much worth the risk, particularly when considering this year's championship aspirations, and as it is, I'm not sure we're not in a better position right now, with more assets in place, to do a better job upgrading.
-
Being over the luxury tax threshold also stops Boston from being able to make sign and trades. That new rule comes into force next summer.
Can't be over the apron after the trade. There's plenty of room still for a sign and trade to be made as it stands. So it's not about being tax payers, but being 4 million above the tax line, since otherwise it would be a circumvention of the hard cap they have set in place.
No sign and trades + mini-MLE = Minimal opportunities to upgrade team via Free Agency
I think there's still an opportunity we have the Full MLE next year. We'll have to see how the luxury tax line plays out next season.
That said, at the very least, Jeff Green is valued as an MLE player so for all intents and purposes, he's the would be MLE acquisition.
He's still young, and a very tradeable contract with some heft, something that is always needed to facilitate big trades when needed.
The "minimal" opportunities to upgrade the team next year and on I think are very much worth the risk, particularly when considering this year's championship aspirations, and as it is, I'm not sure we're not in a better position right now, with more assets in place, to do a better job upgrading.
If Green is a MLE type player, which I agree with, how does it not hurt his trade value that his contract calls for nearly twice his value? With three more years left. Not only might the money be too high for teams to swallow given his production, even projected with starter minutes, but the years make him too risky.
How many teams really need a starting small forward because at 9 million, you better hope he starts even if Ainge doesn't think that's necessary?
Negatives:
Miami
OKC
Chicago
Indiana
Memphis
Lakers
Clippers
Dallas
Portland
Brooklyn
Minnesota
Charlotte
Houston
Golden State (trying to develop Barnes and Green and won't add Green at 9 million to block them)
If you're a team that could start him, would you want to pay him 9 million. He could start for Atlanta but they've set up their salary cap nicely courtesy of Brooklyn and I doubt they want to use a lot of it on Green. He might start for Utah but having Marvin Williams and Green at the same time looks like overkill. Washington's up against the cap so trading for Green would mean taking back bad contracts. New Orleans could use a small forward but again, 9 million. Same with Cleveland. Sacramento's not trading for Green's big contract with their finances. Phoenix was already burnt by Beasley.
I don't see many good trade candidates.
-
WHY do so many people care so much about what Green got paid??? If we was making $7M, would that be better? What does that extra $2-3M get us?
Danny and the owners are so much better at running an NBA team than the members of Celticsblog.
Are you trying to assert that in commenting about a league with a salary cap and restrictive trade rules, no one should focus on what individual players have for contracts?
Let's trade for Biedrins. So what he's going to "earn" $21m the next two years. How about Amare and his uninsured $63m over the next three seasons?
It absolutely does matter that Player A makes $9m x 4 years when you can get the same production from a vetmin making 1/8th that with no long term commitment. It matters that his contract isn't $7m per, which would be a more trade-able slot for his production.
Danny, Doc, Wyc, and the player development group would have jumped all over the opportunity to get a vet min that gives us what Jeff Green gives us.
The fact is - a vet min is not Jeff Green.
People are flipping out about his contract because they think it hurts his trade value. Well, if he is so desired by other teams such that he is a worthy trade chip....why shouldn't he be paid $9M per?
It just pains me to think that people on this board actually believe his true value is half of what he is paid. Like Wyc and Danny just gave him an extra $20 million dollars for being a nice guy. The guy is paid what he is worth on the market in the NBA.
-
Being over the luxury tax threshold also stops Boston from being able to make sign and trades. That new rule comes into force next summer.
Can't be over the apron after the trade. There's plenty of room still for a sign and trade to be made as it stands. So it's not about being tax payers, but being 4 million above the tax line, since otherwise it would be a circumvention of the hard cap they have set in place.
No sign and trades + mini-MLE = Minimal opportunities to upgrade team via Free Agency
I think there's still an opportunity we have the Full MLE next year. We'll have to see how the luxury tax line plays out next season.
That said, at the very least, Jeff Green is valued as an MLE player so for all intents and purposes, he's the would be MLE acquisition.
He's still young, and a very tradeable contract with some heft, something that is always needed to facilitate big trades when needed.
The "minimal" opportunities to upgrade the team next year and on I think are very much worth the risk, particularly when considering this year's championship aspirations, and as it is, I'm not sure we're not in a better position right now, with more assets in place, to do a better job upgrading.
If Green is a MLE type player, which I agree with, how does it not hurt his trade value that his contract calls for nearly twice his value? With three more years left. Not only might the money be too high for teams to swallow given his production, even projected with starter minutes, but the years make him too risky.
How many teams really need a starting small forward because at 9 million, you better hope he starts even if Ainge doesn't think that's necessary?
Negatives:
Miami
OKC
Chicago
Indiana
Memphis
Lakers
Clippers
Dallas
Portland
Brooklyn
Minnesota
Charlotte
Houston
Golden State (trying to develop Barnes and Green and won't add Green at 9 million to block them)
If you're a team that could start him, would you want to pay him 9 million. He could start for Atlanta but they've set up their salary cap nicely courtesy of Brooklyn and I doubt they want to use a lot of it on Green. He might start for Utah but having Marvin Williams and Green at the same time looks like overkill. Washington's up against the cap so trading for Green would mean taking back bad contracts. New Orleans could use a small forward but again, 9 million. Same with Cleveland. Sacramento's not trading for Green's big contract with their finances. Phoenix was already burnt by Beasley.
I don't see many good trade candidates.
I'm in no hurry to trade Jeff Green. If the argument is "hard to trade now", then, no Green means no asset to trade with in the first place. So I really don't see much of a point in pursuing this line of discussion.
-
WHY do so many people care so much about what Green got paid??? If we was making $7M, would that be better? What does that extra $2-3M get us?
Danny and the owners are so much better at running an NBA team than the members of Celticsblog.
Are you trying to assert that in commenting about a league with a salary cap and restrictive trade rules, no one should focus on what individual players have for contracts?
Let's trade for Biedrins. So what he's going to "earn" $21m the next two years. How about Amare and his uninsured $63m over the next three seasons?
It absolutely does matter that Player A makes $9m x 4 years when you can get the same production from a vetmin making 1/8th that with no long term commitment. It matters that his contract isn't $7m per, which would be a more trade-able slot for his production.
Danny, Doc, Wyc, and the player development group would have jumped all over the opportunity to get a vet min that gives us what Jeff Green gives us.
The fact is - a vet min is not Jeff Green.
People are flipping out about his contract because they think it hurts his trade value. Well, if he is so desired by other teams such that he is a worthy trade chip....why shouldn't he be paid $9M per?
It just pains me to think that people on this board actually believe his true value is half of what he is paid. Like Wyc and Danny just gave him an extra $20 million dollars for being a nice guy. The guy is paid what he is worth on the market in the NBA.
Matt Barnes is as productive as Green and he's at the vetmin.
The point I'm trying to make is that a team can get almost as much production to as much production as Green's been given the Cs at 1/8th the cost.
Why Sign Kris Humphries for $11m x two years when Reggie Evans can give you the same thing for 1/10th the money and less of a yearly commitment?
Why lock up a middling player like Green for $9m over four years when almost any run of the mill journeyman SF can get you almost that same production?
If I'm building a roster, I want to use the big money on true stars, and then fill out the roster with vetmin role players who know how to take a reserve role. Not only is Green pedestrian at best as a starter, he's never shown any ability to be an impact 6th man type.
-
WHY do so many people care so much about what Green got paid??? If we was making $7M, would that be better? What does that extra $2-3M get us?
Danny and the owners are so much better at running an NBA team than the members of Celticsblog.
Are you trying to assert that in commenting about a league with a salary cap and restrictive trade rules, no one should focus on what individual players have for contracts?
Let's trade for Biedrins. So what he's going to "earn" $21m the next two years. How about Amare and his uninsured $63m over the next three seasons?
It absolutely does matter that Player A makes $9m x 4 years when you can get the same production from a vetmin making 1/8th that with no long term commitment. It matters that his contract isn't $7m per, which would be a more trade-able slot for his production.
Danny, Doc, Wyc, and the player development group would have jumped all over the opportunity to get a vet min that gives us what Jeff Green gives us.
The fact is - a vet min is not Jeff Green.
People are flipping out about his contract because they think it hurts his trade value. Well, if he is so desired by other teams such that he is a worthy trade chip....why shouldn't he be paid $9M per?
It just pains me to think that people on this board actually believe his true value is half of what he is paid. Like Wyc and Danny just gave him an extra $20 million dollars for being a nice guy. The guy is paid what he is worth on the market in the NBA.
Matt Barnes is as productive as Green and he's at the vetmin.
The point I'm trying to make is that a team can get almost as much production to as much production as Green's been given the Cs at 1/8th the cost.
Why Sign Kris Humphries for $11m x two years when Reggie Evans can give you the same thing for 1/10th the money and less of a yearly commitment?
Why lock up a middling player like Green for $9m over four years when almost any run of the mill journeyman SF can get you almost that same production?
If I'm building a roster, I want to use the big money on true stars, and then fill out the roster with vetmin role players who know how to take a reserve role. Not only is Green pedestrian at best as a starter, he's never shown any ability to be an impact 6th man type.
We're not building a roster though, the roster is already built.
The big money was used on super stars, Green's money wasn't going to be used for anyone else.
-
WHY do so many people care so much about what Green got paid??? If we was making $7M, would that be better? What does that extra $2-3M get us?
Danny and the owners are so much better at running an NBA team than the members of Celticsblog.
Are you trying to assert that in commenting about a league with a salary cap and restrictive trade rules, no one should focus on what individual players have for contracts?
Let's trade for Biedrins. So what he's going to "earn" $21m the next two years. How about Amare and his uninsured $63m over the next three seasons?
It absolutely does matter that Player A makes $9m x 4 years when you can get the same production from a vetmin making 1/8th that with no long term commitment. It matters that his contract isn't $7m per, which would be a more trade-able slot for his production.
Danny, Doc, Wyc, and the player development group would have jumped all over the opportunity to get a vet min that gives us what Jeff Green gives us.
The fact is - a vet min is not Jeff Green.
People are flipping out about his contract because they think it hurts his trade value. Well, if he is so desired by other teams such that he is a worthy trade chip....why shouldn't he be paid $9M per?
It just pains me to think that people on this board actually believe his true value is half of what he is paid. Like Wyc and Danny just gave him an extra $20 million dollars for being a nice guy. The guy is paid what he is worth on the market in the NBA.
Matt Barnes is as productive as Green and he's at the vetmin.
The point I'm trying to make is that a team can get almost as much production to as much production as Green's been given the Cs at 1/8th the cost.
Why Sign Kris Humphries for $11m x two years when Reggie Evans can give you the same thing for 1/10th the money and less of a yearly commitment?
Why lock up a middling player like Green for $9m over four years when almost any run of the mill journeyman SF can get you almost that same production?
If I'm building a roster, I want to use the big money on true stars, and then fill out the roster with vetmin role players who know how to take a reserve role. Not only is Green pedestrian at best as a starter, he's never shown any ability to be an impact 6th man type.
We're not building a roster though, the roster is already built.
The big money was used on super stars, Green's money wasn't going to be used for anyone else.
Well, to play Devils advocate, I would say that the C's may have built the roster for this year, but they still need to build a new core going forward, and signing Green to a big deal like that, does not make it much easier.
On the other hand, I think he is still talented and productive enough to be movable, whether it be for an expiring contract, or if he improves, for positive assets, and as far as this years concerned, you are correct that it doesn't matter what he makes, and as I said before, his large salary slot might actually help the team move him for a better player to help them win now.
-
The guy is paid what he is worth on the market in the NBA.
No.
He is paid what someone is willing to pay him. His worth is determined from his performance and his performance thus far says he was vastly overpaid and not worth the contract.
-
The guy is paid what he is worth on the market in the NBA.
No.
He is paid what someone is willing to pay him. His worth is determined from his performance and his performance thus far says he was vastly overpaid and not worth the contract.
Semantics. There is market value, and then there is your version of worth. Green makes around market value.
-
WHY do so many people care so much about what Green got paid??? If we was making $7M, would that be better? What does that extra $2-3M get us?
Danny and the owners are so much better at running an NBA team than the members of Celticsblog.
Are you trying to assert that in commenting about a league with a salary cap and restrictive trade rules, no one should focus on what individual players have for contracts?
Let's trade for Biedrins. So what he's going to "earn" $21m the next two years. How about Amare and his uninsured $63m over the next three seasons?
It absolutely does matter that Player A makes $9m x 4 years when you can get the same production from a vetmin making 1/8th that with no long term commitment. It matters that his contract isn't $7m per, which would be a more trade-able slot for his production.
Danny, Doc, Wyc, and the player development group would have jumped all over the opportunity to get a vet min that gives us what Jeff Green gives us.
The fact is - a vet min is not Jeff Green.
People are flipping out about his contract because they think it hurts his trade value. Well, if he is so desired by other teams such that he is a worthy trade chip....why shouldn't he be paid $9M per?
It just pains me to think that people on this board actually believe his true value is half of what he is paid. Like Wyc and Danny just gave him an extra $20 million dollars for being a nice guy. The guy is paid what he is worth on the market in the NBA.
Matt Barnes is as productive as Green and he's at the vetmin.
The point I'm trying to make is that a team can get almost as much production to as much production as Green's been given the Cs at 1/8th the cost.
Why Sign Kris Humphries for $11m x two years when Reggie Evans can give you the same thing for 1/10th the money and less of a yearly commitment?
Why lock up a middling player like Green for $9m over four years when almost any run of the mill journeyman SF can get you almost that same production?
If I'm building a roster, I want to use the big money on true stars, and then fill out the roster with vetmin role players who know how to take a reserve role. Not only is Green pedestrian at best as a starter, he's never shown any ability to be an impact 6th man type.
We're not building a roster though, the roster is already built.
The big money was used on super stars, Green's money wasn't going to be used for anyone else.
Well, to play Devils advocate, I would say that the C's may have built the roster for this year, but they still need to build a new core going forward, and signing Green to a big deal like that, does not make it much easier.
On the other hand, I think he is still talented and productive enough to be movable, whether it be for an expiring contract, or if he improves, for positive assets, and as far as this years concerned, you are correct that it doesn't matter what he makes, and as I said before, his large salary slot might actually help the team move him for a better player to help them win now.
On the contrary. We, I think we're better off. I would've preferred a 3 year deal, but 4 is not a deal breaker, considering that year we're way under the cap, plus Green with Lee combine for a good expiring trade package.
-
The guy is paid what he is worth on the market in the NBA.
No.
He is paid what someone is willing to pay him. His worth is determined from his performance and his performance thus far says he was vastly overpaid and not worth the contract.
Jeff Green is not in a position on this team to give us $8 or $9 million worth of production as long as Paul Pierce is the starting small forward. That's just reality, as far as I can see it.
That's not a negative comment towards Jeff or towards Doc or even towards Danny. I'm still happy with the signing. I just think we need to be patient. I understand that patience is not something that sports fans generally do well. It's "give me $9 million worth of basketball today, or you're a bum!!!"
Depending on how long the captain can keep playing like an all star, Jeff's time will come either next season or the following season. Until then, he'll have to keep learning how to play as a 20-25 mpg sub. He's shown some signs that he can play that role really well, and he's had some other nights that have been stinkers. That's how it goes for bench guys.
I'm willing to wait.
-
A $40 mil back-up for PP?
This is what dumb teams do. And why they stink in many cases for decades, not years. Because typically, smart organizations don't ever go where you just went. You sign impact players to big deals, and role players to intelligent short reasonable contracts.... because they're replaceable.
And if you're not really good, let it go -- you're more likely to get good by being bad then you are by being mediocre.
Only All-stars are worth >mid-level. No Bargnanis. No Ty Thomases. No Villenuevas. For Pete's sake, Barbosa is a better basketball player than Green.
I challenge anyone to suggest what they feel the Celtics would be missing without Green. If the only answer is "a back-up to Pierce", or even worse "a SF once Pierce heads towards retirement", then you know how bad the signing is.
Plenty of non all-stars are worth more than the mid level. I'll throw out a ton: Tyson chandler, zach randolph, al jefferson, david west, ibaka, david lee, joakim noah, nic batum, varejao, kevin martin, milsap, ryan anderson, brandon jennings, ty lawson, kyle lowry, gortat, mike conley, carlos boozer, brook lopez, monta ellis,......
Those players would mostly be considered bargains in the 7-12 mil range. I think the hope in the signing was that jeff green could become that caliber of player and be worth his contract. So far he has not lived up to that of course, but i think there's still a chance he could be in the lower tier of that caliber player in a year or 2.
-
The guy is paid what he is worth on the market in the NBA.
No.
He is paid what someone is willing to pay him. His worth is determined from his performance and his performance thus far says he was vastly overpaid and not worth the contract.
Jeff Green is not in a position on this team to give us $8 or $9 million worth of production as long as Paul Pierce is the starting small forward. That's just reality, as far as I can see it.
That's not a negative comment towards Jeff or towards Doc or even towards Danny. I'm still happy with the signing. I just think we need to be patient. I understand that patience is not something that sports fans generally do well. It's "give me $9 million worth of basketball today, or you're a bum!!!"
Depending on how long the captain can keep playing like an all star, Jeff's time will come either next season or the following season. Until then, he'll have to keep learning how to play as a 20-25 mpg sub. He's shown some signs that he can play that role really well, and he's had some other nights that have been stinkers. That's how it goes for bench guys.
I'm willing to wait.
Does a player really have to learn how to play a certain amount of minutes? I don't get it. Why can't he just learn to play better and give a better effort whenever he's on the court?
-
The guy is paid what he is worth on the market in the NBA.
No.
He is paid what someone is willing to pay him. His worth is determined from his performance and his performance thus far says he was vastly overpaid and not worth the contract.
Jeff Green is not in a position on this team to give us $8 or $9 million worth of production as long as Paul Pierce is the starting small forward. That's just reality, as far as I can see it.
That's not a negative comment towards Jeff or towards Doc or even towards Danny. I'm still happy with the signing. I just think we need to be patient. I understand that patience is not something that sports fans generally do well. It's "give me $9 million worth of basketball today, or you're a bum!!!"
Depending on how long the captain can keep playing like an all star, Jeff's time will come either next season or the following season. Until then, he'll have to keep learning how to play as a 20-25 mpg sub. He's shown some signs that he can play that role really well, and he's had some other nights that have been stinkers. That's how it goes for bench guys.
I'm willing to wait.
Does a player really have to learn how to play a certain amount of minutes? I don't get it. Why can't he just learn to play better and give a better effort whenever he's on the court?
I guess my point is that it's hard to expect consistency even from players getting starter's minutes in the NBA. When you are coming off the bench for short stretches, getting @ 20 minutes a game, it's even harder to be consistent. This isn't just the case for Jeff Green, but for almost all NBA players.
He's had some good nights and he's had some bad nights. The same can be said for Jason Terry, Courtney Lee, Brandon Bass, Jared Sullinger, and Chris Wilcox. Those guys are the role players. I don't expect them to play like top flight NBA players every night.
The thing about Jeff Green is that I do think he has 35+ minute a night type talent. We've seen flashes of it, but we won't see it consistently until he can get those minutes. And, that probably won't be this year (maybe not even next year).
Again, I'm willing to be patient, but I understand the predilection not to be.
-
The guy is paid what he is worth on the market in the NBA.
No.
He is paid what someone is willing to pay him. His worth is determined from his performance and his performance thus far says he was vastly overpaid and not worth the contract.
Semantics. There is market value, and then there is your version of worth. Green makes around market value.
No its not really semantics because no one set the market for Jeff Green. Heck, except for some rumors that most people are pretty sure that came from Green's agent, there isn't one single confirmed report of an offer for Jeff green anywhere near what he received.
Not one!
Like the Red Sox used to do in the 90's, the Celtics in this case bid basically against themselves and set the market for Green.
Whether he is actually worth the ridiculous market that the Celtics established for him is yet to be seen.
-
A $40 mil back-up for PP?
This is what dumb teams do. And why they stink in many cases for decades, not years. Because typically, smart organizations don't ever go where you just went. You sign impact players to big deals, and role players to intelligent short reasonable contracts.... because they're replaceable.
And if you're not really good, let it go -- you're more likely to get good by being bad then you are by being mediocre.
Only All-stars are worth >mid-level. No Bargnanis. No Ty Thomases. No Villenuevas. For Pete's sake, Barbosa is a better basketball player than Green.
I challenge anyone to suggest what they feel the Celtics would be missing without Green. If the only answer is "a back-up to Pierce", or even worse "a SF once Pierce heads towards retirement", then you know how bad the signing is.
Plenty of non all-stars are worth more than the mid level. I'll throw out a ton: Tyson chandler, zach randolph, al jefferson, david west, ibaka, david lee, joakim noah, nic batum, varejao, kevin martin, milsap, ryan anderson, brandon jennings, ty lawson, kyle lowry, gortat, mike conley, carlos boozer, brook lopez, monta ellis,......
Those players would mostly be considered bargains in the 7-12 mil range. I think the hope in the signing was that jeff green could become that caliber of player and be worth his contract. So far he has not lived up to that of course, but i think there's still a chance he could be in the lower tier of that caliber player in a year or 2.
Great list of players but I think where you and some other might disagree is whether Jeff Green deserves to be mentioned as being equal quality as those players.
I think those players are on the fringe of being All-Star talent. To me, Jeff Green is on the fringe of having the ability to actually start in the NBA.
There's a fairly decent difference there IMHO.
-
The guy is paid what he is worth on the market in the NBA.
No.
He is paid what someone is willing to pay him. His worth is determined from his performance and his performance thus far says he was vastly overpaid and not worth the contract.
Semantics. There is market value, and then there is your version of worth. Green makes around market value.
No its not really semantics because no one set the market for Jeff Green. Heck, except for some rumors that most people are pretty sure that came from Green's agent, there isn't one single confirmed report of an offer for Jeff green anywhere near what he received.
Not one!
Like the Red Sox used to do in the 90's, the Celtics in this case bid basically against themselves and set the market for Green.
Whether he is actually worth the ridiculous market that the Celtics established for him is yet to be seen.
Are you his agent?
-
The thing about Jeff Green is that I do think he has 35+ minute a night type talent. We've seen flashes of it, but we won't see it consistently until he can get those minutes.
This is where we differ. I think you show whether you have the ability to get 35 minutes a game buy playing at your best consistently for less time. Fact is that stats prove out that no matter what amount of minutes Jeff green gets, his level of performance doesn't get better or more consistent.
Given starters minutes in OKC he produced almost the exact same per minute stats and he was reknown for being wildly inconsistent in his effort and production and was never a good rebounder.
Nothing has changed. He's just playing less.
-
Not trying to be a troll, but can someone find me one - just one - other team that was interested in Jeff Green this offseason? I know his agent said there were like 10 other teams or something that were interested - can anyone provide any proof of one of those teams?
-
Not trying to be a troll, but can someone find me one - just one - other team that was interested in Jeff Green this offseason? I know his agent said there were like 10 other teams or something that were interested - can anyone provide any proof of one of those teams?
Can anyone provide proof of interest of any team in any player, unless the GM comes out and says it?
Rumors that are reported are generally just leaked by the agents anyways, so they hold no more water than Green's agent saying 10 other teams were interested.
-
Not trying to be a troll, but can someone find me one - just one - other team that was interested in Jeff Green this offseason? I know his agent said there were like 10 other teams or something that were interested - can anyone provide any proof of one of those teams?
Can anyone provide proof of interest of any team in any player, unless the GM comes out and says it?
Rumors that are reported are generally just leaked by the agents anyways, so they hold no more water than Green's agent saying 10 other teams were interested.
Really. Seems to me Wojo is pretty fairly well connected and gets a lot of his numbers of what people are offering players from different teams fairly accurate.
It was reported the Celtics offered Ray twice the money as Miami and that was later confirmed by Danny and Doc.
That's just one example of reports coming out from multiple teams. Reports of other players getting multiple offers, what the offer is and the amount of years are rather common place
-
The guy is paid what he is worth on the market in the NBA.
No.
He is paid what someone is willing to pay him. His worth is determined from his performance and his performance thus far says he was vastly overpaid and not worth the contract.
Jeff Green is not in a position on this team to give us $8 or $9 million worth of production as long as Paul Pierce is the starting small forward. That's just reality, as far as I can see it.
That's not a negative comment towards Jeff or towards Doc or even towards Danny. I'm still happy with the signing. I just think we need to be patient. I understand that patience is not something that sports fans generally do well. It's "give me $9 million worth of basketball today, or you're a bum!!!"
Depending on how long the captain can keep playing like an all star, Jeff's time will come either next season or the following season. Until then, he'll have to keep learning how to play as a 20-25 mpg sub. He's shown some signs that he can play that role really well, and he's had some other nights that have been stinkers. That's how it goes for bench guys.
I'm willing to wait.
Does a player really have to learn how to play a certain amount of minutes? I don't get it. Why can't he just learn to play better and give a better effort whenever he's on the court?
I guess my point is that it's hard to expect consistency even from players getting starter's minutes in the NBA. When you are coming off the bench for short stretches, getting @ 20 minutes a game, it's even harder to be consistent. This isn't just the case for Jeff Green, but for almost all NBA players.
He's had some good nights and he's had some bad nights. The same can be said for Jason Terry, Courtney Lee, Brandon Bass, Jared Sullinger, and Chris Wilcox. Those guys are the role players. I don't expect them to play like top flight NBA players every night.
The thing about Jeff Green is that I do think he has 35+ minute a night type talent. We've seen flashes of it, but we won't see it consistently until he can get those minutes. And, that probably won't be this year (maybe not even next year).
Again, I'm willing to be patient, but I understand the predilection not to be.
I don't buy that. Can you name a couple current good nba starters who would suck coming off the bench? I can't think of any.
-
A $40 mil back-up for PP?
This is what dumb teams do. And why they stink in many cases for decades, not years. Because typically, smart organizations don't ever go where you just went. You sign impact players to big deals, and role players to intelligent short reasonable contracts.... because they're replaceable.
And if you're not really good, let it go -- you're more likely to get good by being bad then you are by being mediocre.
Only All-stars are worth >mid-level. No Bargnanis. No Ty Thomases. No Villenuevas. For Pete's sake, Barbosa is a better basketball player than Green.
I challenge anyone to suggest what they feel the Celtics would be missing without Green. If the only answer is "a back-up to Pierce", or even worse "a SF once Pierce heads towards retirement", then you know how bad the signing is.
Plenty of non all-stars are worth more than the mid level. I'll throw out a ton: Tyson chandler, zach randolph, al jefferson, david west, ibaka, david lee, joakim noah, nic batum, varejao, kevin martin, milsap, ryan anderson, brandon jennings, ty lawson, kyle lowry, gortat, mike conley, carlos boozer, brook lopez, monta ellis,......
Those players would mostly be considered bargains in the 7-12 mil range. I think the hope in the signing was that jeff green could become that caliber of player and be worth his contract. So far he has not lived up to that of course, but i think there's still a chance he could be in the lower tier of that caliber player in a year or 2.
Great list of players but I think where you and some other might disagree is whether Jeff Green deserves to be mentioned as being equal quality as those players.
I think those players are on the fringe of being All-Star talent. To me, Jeff Green is on the fringe of having the ability to actually start in the NBA.
There's a fairly decent difference there IMHO.
Agreed. This is a list of players who have reached All-star teams, are starting NBA 5s or DPOY candidates. There are also a number of players either a) making less than Green (including some still on their rookie deals -- not sure why you listed them), or b) who should clearly not make the money you're talking about.
i have no interest in paying Ellis, Lee, Boozer or Batum cornerstone money -- not if i'm trying to win a championship.
Green is clearly a step down from virtually the entire list, and regardless the question remains: what would this team be missing without Jeff Green? Every time the guys scores 15 points -- to go along with his lazy rebounding and poor defense -- there's a new article about him "emerging". It's like a bad joke.
-
We need to get rid of Bass, bring in another quality defensive big man who can play the 5 and then give Jeff Green 30+ mpg as a bench combo forward, a la Al Harrington.
I think that's the best way to maximize his talent alongside Rondo/KG/Pierce.
-
A $40 mil back-up for PP?
This is what dumb teams do. And why they stink in many cases for decades, not years. Because typically, smart organizations don't ever go where you just went. You sign impact players to big deals, and role players to intelligent short reasonable contracts.... because they're replaceable.
And if you're not really good, let it go -- you're more likely to get good by being bad then you are by being mediocre.
Only All-stars are worth >mid-level. No Bargnanis. No Ty Thomases. No Villenuevas. For Pete's sake, Barbosa is a better basketball player than Green.
I challenge anyone to suggest what they feel the Celtics would be missing without Green. If the only answer is "a back-up to Pierce", or even worse "a SF once Pierce heads towards retirement", then you know how bad the signing is.
Plenty of non all-stars are worth more than the mid level. I'll throw out a ton: Tyson chandler, zach randolph, al jefferson, david west, ibaka, david lee, joakim noah, nic batum, varejao, kevin martin, milsap, ryan anderson, brandon jennings, ty lawson, kyle lowry, gortat, mike conley, carlos boozer, brook lopez, monta ellis,......
Those players would mostly be considered bargains in the 7-12 mil range. I think the hope in the signing was that jeff green could become that caliber of player and be worth his contract. So far he has not lived up to that of course, but i think there's still a chance he could be in the lower tier of that caliber player in a year or 2.
Great list of players but I think where you and some other might disagree is whether Jeff Green deserves to be mentioned as being equal quality as those players.
I think those players are on the fringe of being All-Star talent. To me, Jeff Green is on the fringe of having the ability to actually start in the NBA.
There's a fairly decent difference there IMHO.
Agreed. This is a list of players who have reached All-star teams, are starting NBA 5s or DPOY candidates. There are also a number of players either a) making less than Green (including some still on their rookie deals -- not sure why you listed them), or b) who should clearly not make the money you're talking about.
i have no interest in paying Ellis, Lee, Boozer or Batum cornerstone money -- not if i'm trying to win a championship.
Green is clearly a step down from virtually the entire list, and regardless the question remains: what would this team be missing without Jeff Green? Every time the guys scores 15 points -- to go along with his lazy rebounding and poor defense -- there's a new article about him "emerging". It's like a bad joke.
That's the truth. It's almost comical at this point.
-
The thing about Jeff Green is that I do think he has 35+ minute a night type talent. We've seen flashes of it, but we won't see it consistently until he can get those minutes.
This is where we differ. I think you show whether you have the ability to get 35 minutes a game buy playing at your best consistently for less time. Fact is that stats prove out that no matter what amount of minutes Jeff green gets, his level of performance doesn't get better or more consistent.
Given starters minutes in OKC he produced almost the exact same per minute stats and he was reknown for being wildly inconsistent in his effort and production and was never a good rebounder.
Nothing has changed. He's just playing less.
Luol Deng, Gerald Wallace, and Thaddeus Young are a small sampling of players whose numbers are fairly similar to Jeff Green's on a per 36 minute basis. Those guys happen to be getting bigger minutes, though, so they can put up better overall numbers.
Jeff's numbers are slightly down from his career averages this season, particularly his rebounding numbers, but they aren't far off, and they are roughly what we should expect from him in 20 something minutes per contest. There's definitely some room for improvement, though; improvements that I think Jeff can make.
-
Can anyone provide proof of interest of any team in any player, unless the GM comes out and says it?
Rumors that are reported are generally just leaked by the agents anyways, so they hold no more water than Green's agent saying 10 other teams were interested.
It doesn't seem odd to you at all? It seems every free agent is connected to a couple specific teams in the media. Anyone from Jermaine O'Neal (who was thought to be going to the Lakers, before the Suns), Matt Barnes to the higher echelon players. The agent didn't leak a single specific team? Not one other GM mentioned to a single reporter anonymously, 'Oh hey, Jeff Green is on our radar."?
-
Not trying to be a troll, but can someone find me one - just one - other team that was interested in Jeff Green this offseason? I know his agent said there were like 10 other teams or something that were interested - can anyone provide any proof of one of those teams?
Can anyone provide proof of interest of any team in any player, unless the GM comes out and says it?
Rumors that are reported are generally just leaked by the agents anyways, so they hold no more water than Green's agent saying 10 other teams were interested.
Really. Seems to me Wojo is pretty fairly well connected and gets a lot of his numbers of what people are offering players from different teams fairly accurate.
It was reported the Celtics offered Ray twice the money as Miami and that was later confirmed by Danny and Doc.
That's just one example of reports coming out from multiple teams. Reports of other players getting multiple offers, what the offer is and the amount of years are rather common place
Right, that's because the agent leaks it. Green's agent never leaked it.
-
Right, that's because the agent leaks it. Green's agent never leaked it.
I'm confused. We know for a fact that Jeff Green's agent didn't leak anything about the contract negotiations to the media?
-
A $40 mil back-up for PP?
This is what dumb teams do. And why they stink in many cases for decades, not years. Because typically, smart organizations don't ever go where you just went. You sign impact players to big deals, and role players to intelligent short reasonable contracts.... because they're replaceable.
And if you're not really good, let it go -- you're more likely to get good by being bad then you are by being mediocre.
Only All-stars are worth >mid-level. No Bargnanis. No Ty Thomases. No Villenuevas. For Pete's sake, Barbosa is a better basketball player than Green.
I challenge anyone to suggest what they feel the Celtics would be missing without Green. If the only answer is "a back-up to Pierce", or even worse "a SF once Pierce heads towards retirement", then you know how bad the signing is.
Plenty of non all-stars are worth more than the mid level. I'll throw out a ton: Tyson chandler, zach randolph, al jefferson, david west, ibaka, david lee, joakim noah, nic batum, varejao, kevin martin, milsap, ryan anderson, brandon jennings, ty lawson, kyle lowry, gortat, mike conley, carlos boozer, brook lopez, monta ellis,......
Those players would mostly be considered bargains in the 7-12 mil range. I think the hope in the signing was that jeff green could become that caliber of player and be worth his contract. So far he has not lived up to that of course, but i think there's still a chance he could be in the lower tier of that caliber player in a year or 2.
Great list of players but I think where you and some other might disagree is whether Jeff Green deserves to be mentioned as being equal quality as those players.
I think those players are on the fringe of being All-Star talent. To me, Jeff Green is on the fringe of having the ability to actually start in the NBA.
There's a fairly decent difference there IMHO.
Agreed. This is a list of players who have reached All-star teams, are starting NBA 5s or DPOY candidates. There are also a number of players either a) making less than Green (including some still on their rookie deals -- not sure why you listed them), or b) who should clearly not make the money you're talking about.
i have no interest in paying Ellis, Lee, Boozer or Batum cornerstone money -- not if i'm trying to win a championship.
Green is clearly a step down from virtually the entire list, and regardless the question remains: what would this team be missing without Jeff Green? Every time the guys scores 15 points -- to go along with his lazy rebounding and poor defense -- there's a new article about him "emerging". It's like a bad joke.
That's the truth. It's almost comical at this point.
I agree Jeff Green has absolutely not shown that he is the caliber player of those in the list. What I'm saying is that at the time of the signing, management hoped he had the potential to become the caliber of non all-stars like D. Lee, Ryan Anderson, Millsap, conley, batum who are all pretty worthy of 7-10 m per year. If Green gets there, I don't think his contract is a bad deal. He clearly hasn't yet, but I'm not absolutely writing that off yet.
And, "most of them" have not reached all star games nor are DPOY candidates. I don't know where you are getting that idea from. Look it up... And a player who was last an all-star 4 years ago is not an "all-star player". Unless you think T-Mac and gilbert arenas are all-star players. The point is that tons of non all-stars are worthy of more than the MLE.
-
Not trying to be a troll, but can someone find me one - just one - other team that was interested in Jeff Green this offseason? I know his agent said there were like 10 other teams or something that were interested - can anyone provide any proof of one of those teams?
How exactly would you prove a team was interested in Green? And, even if you have no evidence that any other teams had an interest in Green, his contract is fairly indicative that interest existed.
-
Leandro Barbosa is not a better player than Jeff Green and anybody who suggests otherwise is being flip or doesn't know much about basketball.
In my opinion.
-
Not trying to be a troll, but can someone find me one - just one - other team that was interested in Jeff Green this offseason? I know his agent said there were like 10 other teams or something that were interested - can anyone provide any proof of one of those teams?
How exactly would you prove a team was interested in Green? And, even if you have no evidence that any other teams had an interest in Green, his contract is fairly indicative that interest existed.
I agree with this. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/sam_amick/06/16/jeff.green/index.html
This article has has the agent saying 12-14 teams were interested. You can't "prove" that any team really was. But even if Falk did name a particular team or 2, that still isn't proof that team actually had interest just because he named them.
-
Love Green as a player, I just think he is in a bad situation for his talents. At 9 mil a year for four years on any team where he could be starting and get minutes I think that is very fair. However, with the Celts he isnt going to be as productive because he isnt going to get the minutes he needs to showcase his game. Its just the type of player he is. In result, for the Celtics his contract looks bad for the role he is being asked to play.
You see, this just isn't true. His per 36 minute rates are just about identical now than when he was starting and playing 36 MPG in OKC. All more minutes do is give him proportionally the same stats he always had. And he gets those stats from being really good for stretches of games and then disappearing for stretches of games.
He is the same animal he always was and that animal isn't worth his contract or a starting job on a title contender unless he is a fourth option offensively and doesn't have to be relied upon.
Your point is well made and probably predictive of the Jeff Green of Christmas future. But I am not convinced that the contract is an albatross. He makes 9M which is about 3-4M more than he should be making IMO. Not good, but not catastrophic. If he somehow can consistently score 12-16 PPG at 25 minutes (yes, a new Jeff Green), he still may not be worth 9M in Boston, but I would contend that he'd be a very tradable commodity. He'd need to be packaged with young talent (Bradley or Sullinger) but Green would have value despite his contract.
-
Leandro Barbosa is not a better player than Jeff Green and anybody who suggests otherwise is being flip or doesn't know much about basketball.
In my opinion.
Agree 100% not even close...
-
When Jeff Green was on his little 5 to 6 game hot streak 10 days ago, this blog boomed with the "Green needs to start", "Time to sit Pierce", "Free Jeff Green" and al sorts of other ridiculous threads.
When I posted in those threads that Pierce was still, even at 35 years old a better all around player than Jeff Green, that Jeff Green was a passive player that would go through wild ups and downs in consistency and that Jeff Green was simply doing what Jeff Green does, which is play well for a few games and then disappear for a few, a lot of Jeff Green fans jumped all over me and some others who said the same thing.
But here we are after 25 games and Jeff Green is going through his normal roller coaster ride through the season. He started off slow and passive. He was a horrid rebounder who couldn't score and who's defense was just plain bad. Then the ball started dropping some, he played with confidence and played much better for a few games.
But that confidence breeds complacency in Jeff Green and now we see the result. Over his last five games he's been back to the passive, non-rebounding, poor shooting, bad defense Jeff Green. In that time he has shot 34% from the field, 30% from 3PT land, he didn't shoot more than one free throw in 4 of those 5 games and averaged just 8 PPG and 3 RPG in his usual 23 MPG.
$9 million a year, 4 year contracts are given out to performers that will give you a consistent, everyday, effort and production. That has never been Jeff Green's calling card. He's playing exactly like Jeff Green has always played. Its the reason OKC would give him the money he wanted and its why Danny Ainge should have given him a large, you have to earn it, one year deal and not the contract he got.
And if Green said no, Danny should have let him walk?
Absolutely.
So who's the backup sf, Joseph or Lee?
Honestly don't remember who was available. If the Celtics weren't committed to Jeff early on my guess is after solidifying the SG position after Ray left, back up SF would have been their next priority.
If you remember our cap position at the time it was either get jeff green with his rights or sign some minimum level floopsy. Pietrus wanted more than minimum level money. I would rather Jeff green than some flog that 29 other teams have rejected. This signing was the right move to try and be competitive at small forward this year.
I would rather have Marquis Daniels at next to nothing than Jeff Green at $9 million a year. Same minutes, almost same stats. $8.1 million a year less.
Ahh the old "this guy is getting these numbers on this team with this coach so he'll do the exact same on our team with our coach" thing. Pretty hard to say that when quisey was here for a couple years and didn't really produce.
-
Leandro Barbosa is not a better player than Jeff Green and anybody who suggests otherwise is being flip or doesn't know much about basketball.
In my opinion.
Agree 100% not even close...
And you guys base this on what?
Barbosa has had about 3 or 4 strong games this year and in every other game he has been pretty much invisiable.
His off / def ratings on NBA.com suggest that he has the second worst offensive rating and the second worst defensive rating on our team - but behind only Jason Collins (who has been am absolute joke on both ends).
Jeff on the other hand is getting to the point where he's probably had one strong game for every bad game - he's treading that line at about 50/50. This is not good enough for somoebody making what he is, but it's a hell of a lot better than what Barbosa has given us.
The only thing Barbosa has really done well consistently is run the offense as Rondo's backup - his assist/turnover ration is exceptional and not far off Rondo's not because he gets a ton of assiss, but because he rarely ever turns it over.
Still that certainly does not make him better than Green who has done a decent job at times (though inconsistently) with his rebounding and scoring - not so good a job on defense though...but the stats suggest he's done better than Barbosa in that area too.
-
The guy is paid what he is worth on the market in the NBA.
No.
He is paid what someone is willing to pay him. His worth is determined from his performance and his performance thus far says he was vastly overpaid and not worth the contract.
Um..."He is paid what someone is willing to pay him." is the definition of market value.
You fail at economics.
-
Leandro Barbosa is not a better player than Jeff Green and anybody who suggests otherwise is being flip or doesn't know much about basketball.
In my opinion.
Agree 100% not even close...
And you guys base this on what?
Barbosa has had about 3 or 4 strong games this year and in every other game he has been pretty much invisiable.
His off / def ratings on NBA.com suggest that he has the second worst offensive rating and the second worst defensive rating on our team - but behind only Jason Collins (who has been am absolute joke on both ends).
Jeff on the other hand is getting to the point where he's probably had one strong game for every bad game - he's treading that line at about 50/50. This is not good enough for somoebody making what he is, but it's a hell of a lot better than what Barbosa has given us.
The only thing Barbosa has really done well consistently is run the offense as Rondo's backup - his assist/turnover ration is exceptional and not far off Rondo's not because he gets a ton of assiss, but because he rarely ever turns it over.
Still that certainly does not make him better than Green who has done a decent job at times (though inconsistently) with his rebounding and scoring - not so good a job on defense though...but the stats suggest he's done better than Barbosa in that area too.
So . . . you agree with us?
-
The guy is paid what he is worth on the market in the NBA.
No.
He is paid what someone is willing to pay him. His worth is determined from his performance and his performance thus far says he was vastly overpaid and not worth the contract.
Um..."He is paid what someone is willing to pay him." is the definition of market value.
You fail at economics.
Yeah, 90% of the players in the NBA are "overpaid" given their production and the other 10% are drastically "underpaid."
Value is not the same thing as market value.
Market value is the cost that the market will bear, meaning what somebody is willing to pay.
We can debate whether or not it was wise of the Celtics to pay Jeff market value, but I think it's safe to assume, especially looking at the other contracts that were handed out this summer, that Jeff's contract is a good representation of what some team would have paid him.