Bad signings as of now.
I think Lee has a better chance to make good on his deal just because of the lower value.
I agree. Its pretty hard to argue otherwise. Lee will improve and / or is pretty tradable.
My understanding is that the Cs wanted to do right by Green, both because they think he's a great kid -- they really like him and hope he can grow into that contract -- but in no small part because they wanted to show NBA players that they take care of their guys, even those who go through hard times.... that Boston is a great place to sign, not just to be traded to / drafted to and play.
Still -- his contract is extremely hard to understand. They were bidding against themselves at that dollar amount and year total. Anyone who says they weren't perplexed when they read the news is fibbing....
Well, Boston NEEDED a decent small-forward, and since they had already spent the MLE on JET and didn't have much for trade assets, pretty much the only guy they could sign based on the CBA's logistics was Green. It was either re-sign Green or pick up someone with only the LLE/vet-min contract.
Not suggesting that they shouldn't have signed him. I'm saying his contract is poor, and was likely unnecessary.
I don't disagree; they paid more than what Green's value likely would have been without all the CBA issues.
But, while the C's may have been the only team seriously bidding for Jeff Green's services, Jeff Green being really the only small forward that Boston could realistically bring aboard to spell Pierce significantly weakened their own bargaining position. If they only offered Green an MLE-level deal and he walked, the C's would be pretty well hosed. You'd be counting on Kris Joseph and maybe a vet-min guy to keep Pierce's minutes in check.
The C's were *not* bargaining from a position of strength.
The question in my mind; should JET have been the priority, or should they have explored signing a small forward earlier in the free agency process?
i get your point, but i think you're stretching it.
1) Green wanted to be here. The Cs treated him well while ill, and he has the opportunity to become a lead guy as the torch is passed from Pierce - he'd of stayed under a competitive offer.
2) You don't see good NBA front offices put such a high percentage of their cap for so long (4 years) against a role guy with no truly unique skill and questionable health. See SAS, OKC, Dallas, etc. And Ainge usually doesn't. Green's deal was / is the same length as Rondo's at about 75% of the value. Ouch.
3) The difference in production had the Cs just signed Josh Howard or the like -- at least thus far -- is negligible.
I get it -- the Cs got caught up in an 'all in' mentality around players whose rights they maintained because of their shortage of cap options. Doesn't mean it was the right decision.