next »

[Celtics18]

If Jeff has a good game tonight, will that count as a streak of good games?

[Roy H.]

If Jeff has a good game tonight, will that count as a streak of good games?

It will indeed, and I'll be rooting for him.  I'd like nothing more than to see him rattle of a string of 8 to 10 double digit games in a row.

[jyyzzoel]

it's just not in his nature.  it's like waiting for greg stiemsma waiting to turn into hakeem olajuwon, or myself waiting to get an nba call up - it's just not going to happen because that person in incapable of doing it.

he is not a good passer. never has been.  he is not a good rebounder. never has been. check out this page:  http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/greenje02.html

he's putting up the exact same numbers he has his whole career. he's just not capable of becoming the player you think he can be.

if you look at his game logs throughout his whole career, he will only ever put up about 16 points per a game BUT he will do it in about 35 minutes of game time.  he's getting 22 minutes a game - he's giving you all he has (he just doesn't have that much).

here are his game logs:  http://espn.go.com/nba/player/gamelog/_/id/3209/year/2010/jeff-green

do the math.  he can definitely put together a bunch of bad games.  that's not even a question.  throughout his career he will rarely put together 3 good games in a row - and if you think he does, i will ask you how many minutes he played to pad his stats, and ask you to divide the number of minutes so as to get what that output is every 22 minutes.

the thing is that jeff green needs to be passed the ball by another player while he is two feet from the hoop so he can score, OR while he drives right (which is really one of his only moves) the other player needs to foul him, so that he can get to the line for some easy free throws.  if he drives right and doesnt get fouled, he will miss more often than not.

and just by the by, his other moves are standing in the corner waiting for someone to pass him the ball so he can shoot the three, and driving left and (like he often does when driving) clumsily barging into anyone there and tossing up a prayer. he rarely works outside of this.

he's never been a good player.  his position adjusted winscore throught his whole career has been pretty much the same.  he's more or less the worst small forward in the league, but like all clueless gm's do, the public thinks that if he can score 16 points in 35 minutes, that means he's a good player... without realising the game of basketball is so much bigger than that one stat.

check out his position adjusted winscore per 48: http://www.thenbageek.com/players/13-jeff-green

it's pretty much the same his whole career. to be starter material you need to be at least .09 per 48 minutes, and he is soooooooooooo far off that, and always has been. he looks like a basketball player - he's tall, long and athletic... but he can't play very well.

[OsirusCeltics]

Not even Terry or Ginobli in their primes ever had consistent scoring outputs

This isn't true at all.  I'm curious what this argument is based upon.

In 2008, Ginobili averaged 19.5 points on 46% shooting and a 40% 3PT%.

In 2009, Terry averaged 19.6 points on 46% shooting and a 37% 3PT%.

Both Ginobili and Terry were very consistent players.  That doesn't mean they scored 15 or 20 points every night -- no player does -- but they played very well consistently.

Agree they were consistent, but I mean to say even the best bench players of this era still had 5 point or 8 point games some nights. Green just needs more minutes to show the consistency

[moiso]

it's just not in his nature.  it's like waiting for greg stiemsma waiting to turn into hakeem olajuwon, or myself waiting to get an nba call up - it's just not going to happen because that person in incapable of doing it.

he is not a good passer. never has been.  he is not a good rebounder. never has been. check out this page:  http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/greenje02.html

he's putting up the exact same numbers he has his whole career. he's just not capable of becoming the player you think he can be.

if you look at his game logs throughout his whole career, he will only ever put up about 16 points per a game BUT he will do it in about 35 minutes of game time.  he's getting 22 minutes a game - he's giving you all he has (he just doesn't have that much).

here are his game logs:  http://espn.go.com/nba/player/gamelog/_/id/3209/year/2010/jeff-green

do the math.  he can definitely put together a bunch of bad games.  that's not even a question.  throughout his career he will rarely put together 3 good games in a row - and if you think he does, i will ask you how many minutes he played to pad his stats, and ask you to divide the number of minutes so as to get what that output is every 22 minutes.

the thing is that jeff green needs to be passed the ball by another player while he is two feet from the hoop so he can score, OR while he drives right (which is really one of his only moves) the other player needs to foul him, so that he can get to the line for some easy free throws.  if he drives right and doesnt get fouled, he will miss more often than not.

and just by the by, his other moves are standing in the corner waiting for someone to pass him the ball so he can shoot the three, and driving left and (like he often does when driving) clumsily barging into anyone there and tossing up a prayer. he rarely works outside of this.

he's never been a good player.  his position adjusted winscore throught his whole career has been pretty much the same.  he's more or less the worst small forward in the league, but like all clueless gm's do, the public thinks that if he can score 16 points in 35 minutes, that means he's a good player... without realising the game of basketball is so much bigger than that one stat.

check out his position adjusted winscore per 48: http://www.thenbageek.com/players/13-jeff-green

it's pretty much the same his whole career. to be starter material you need to be at least .09 per 48 minutes, and he is soooooooooooo far off that, and always has been. he looks like a

basketball player - he's tall, long and athletic... but he can't play very well.

great post.

[PhoSita]

I'm not sure that more minutes is suddenly going to make him into a better scorer.

Likely not.

More consistent though?  That seems much more likely.

[LooseCannon]

It's just bizarre.  Offensively, Green looks valuable 50% of the time, and borderline terrible the other 50% of the time.  He doesn't really go through slumps, or through hot streaks.  Rather, he is schizophrenic in two-game blocks.

Arguably, this is a more valuable pattern than if he were consistently performing at the mediocre average between these two extremes, never having a really good or really bad game.

[Roy H.]

We'll chalk this thread up to a reverse jinx (after the fact, Bill Simmons style, since Green seems to be on his way to extending his "good offensive game" streak to three.

[Snakehead]

Attacking the rim, knocking down his jump shots.  Holding that ball up high ala Worthy and bringing it down on people's heads.  Being active on D.

This is the Jeff Green I love to see.

[get_banners]

re: jeff's #'s, he's not going to put up a ton of points (despite the minutes) because he's never been the #1 scoring option. in OKC, he was the 3rd or 4th option. since he's been here, he's (at best) the 3rd option. part of that is his nature (he tries to take the open shot, move the ball, etc.), but part of it is simply him not taking that many shots. now, if he does keep up this "being aggressive" mentality, then i think his numbers will go up. for me, i'll look to whether he's playing active on D, and attacking when there are openings on offense. he has all the physical tools to be great (and he certainly was in college), but given his teammates, the (thus far) limited planned plays for him, and his nature to not force bad shots, i wouldn't expect him to ever have great scoring numbers.

[Redz]

We'll chalk this thread up to a reverse jinx (after the fact, Bill Simmons style, since Green seems to be on his way to extending his "good offensive game" streak to three.

indeed

[ssspence]

We'll chalk this thread up to a reverse jinx (after the fact, Bill Simmons style, since Green seems to be on his way to extending his "good offensive game" streak to three.

9 pts, 2 boards in 18 minutes.... weeeeeee!

at least he was a +something for a change.

[Roy H.]

We'll chalk this thread up to a reverse jinx (after the fact, Bill Simmons style, since Green seems to be on his way to extending his "good offensive game" streak to three.

9 pts, 2 boards in 18 minutes.... weeeeeee!

at least he was a +something for a change.

Great first half for Green (9 points, 4-for-6 shooting), poor second half (0 points, 0-for-3 shooting).

This one didn't meet my arbitrary criteria for a "good" game, but it wasn't a bad one, either.  Green was a big part of building the early lead tonight.

[mmmmm]

We'll chalk this thread up to a reverse jinx (after the fact, Bill Simmons style, since Green seems to be on his way to extending his "good offensive game" streak to three.

9 pts, 2 boards in 18 minutes.... weeeeeee!

at least he was a +something for a change.

Great first half for Green (9 points, 4-for-6 shooting), poor second half (0 points, 0-for-3 shooting).

This one didn't meet my arbitrary criteria for a "good" game, but it wasn't a bad one, either.  Green was a big part of building the early lead tonight.

This is where the criteria don't work.

Green only played 4 minutes in the second half.  The idea that he didn't get minutes because he didn't earn them doesn't make sense.  The reality is just that others played well (especially Pierce in the 3rd) and Green just wasn't inserted much in the second half.

Similarly, Sully scored all his 14 points in the first half.  His quiet second half didn't mean he had a mediocre game.  He, like Green, had a great game.

As I said earlier, this method of measuring 'good game' versus 'bad game' just isn't very useful.

[ssspence]

We'll chalk this thread up to a reverse jinx (after the fact, Bill Simmons style, since Green seems to be on his way to extending his "good offensive game" streak to three.

9 pts, 2 boards in 18 minutes.... weeeeeee!

at least he was a +something for a change.

Great first half for Green (9 points, 4-for-6 shooting), poor second half (0 points, 0-for-3 shooting).

This one didn't meet my arbitrary criteria for a "good" game, but it wasn't a bad one, either.  Green was a big part of building the early lead tonight.

rosey-ish glasses. but baby steps, i guess.

Green still went through stretches with weird glue in his shoes, and then super active 2-3 minutes stretches. don't really understand the guy, at all.