Author Topic: Bass and green for josh smith? RUMORS.  (Read 5248 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Bass and green for josh smith? RUMORS.
« Reply #75 on: February 17, 2013, 06:49:18 PM »

Offline FallGuy

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1941
  • Tommy Points: 70
It's surprising how many people are fooled by Green's recent play. The guy's a dud. Has been his whole career.
That's funny, because Green's recent play is indicative of what he's been over most of his career.

His performance with us is to to a large extent an artifact of the role we have for him on the roster.

I agree with your first paragraph. He's a league-average tweener forward who can't rebound who is being paid like a second-tier star. He was a level or two worse than that over the first few months of the season. So, he's ascended to mediocrity.
Your grasp of how much stars are paid is quite far from reality.

Top players in the NBA right now command a $16-20-million. Guys you're calling "second-tier stars" are typically paid in the $12 million range (see Batum in Portland and Lopez in Brooklyn).

Green is paid as much as Gerald Wallace and Jameer Nelson, who have third banana written all over them.

Even if we go with your definition, cost-wise, he's not a third-tier guy. He's probably best suited to be the 5th or 6th best guy on a title team. How much do you wanna pay for that?

Re: Bass and green for josh smith? RUMORS.
« Reply #76 on: February 17, 2013, 06:52:38 PM »

Offline ssspence

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • ****
  • Posts: 4578
  • Tommy Points: 264
  • James Naismith to Dickey Betts for the jam.....

Green is paid as much as Gerald Wallace and Jameer Nelson, who have third banana written all over them.

Both of whom are overpaid.  If you put either of these two on waivers, no team would pick them up.

There are star players paid less than your second tier, and there are excellent players paid less than Green, Wallace or Nelson. 

Heck, there are even highly productive players working on bi-annual exception and vet min deals. Much depends on circumstance, and the leverage and intelligence of the respective organization.

Bottom line: Negotiation happens.


Re: Bass and green for josh smith? RUMORS.
« Reply #77 on: February 17, 2013, 06:58:01 PM »

Offline nickagneta

  • Bob Cousy
  • **************************
  • Posts: 26949
  • Tommy Points: 2004
It's surprising how many people are fooled by Green's recent play. The guy's a dud. Has been his whole career.
That's funny, because Green's recent play is indicative of what he's been over most of his career.

His performance with us is to to a large extent an artifact of the role we have for him on the roster.

Dude. I did not say that at all! Don't misquote me!!
So please explain what you said, because I am confused.

I take you to mean that his recent play suggests that he's not a dud, which misleads people -- my answer to this is that his recent play is pretty much indicative of what he's been over the course of his career when given minutes.
This just isn't true kozlodev.

Green's aggregate numbers this year are about what he has had his entire career. His per minute stats are almost exactly the same.

But his recent play, say taking his going back a month(11 games), is not what he has always done. He's much more efficient offensively and he actually is playing very good defense. Over 50% shooting. Over 40% from three. Over 90% from the line while getting to the line by more 1.2 FT per minute. That shows aggression which, once again, he has never been known for.

I am not a fan of Jeff Green's. Heck I have been killing him most of this year. But over his recent stretch, he's been a different player than what he has always been. He's becoming the player some thought he could become.

Then again, its only 11 games and time will tell. He could go into another lackadaisical stretch and even his per minute numbers out like he always has because he is prone to stretches of games of being amazing and then disappearing.
2015 CB HISTORICAL DRAFT: COMING THIS OCTOBER
FORMAT:
3 players from 1960-73
3 players from 1974-86
3 players from 1987-00
3 players from 2001-Pres
1 player from any era

Re: Bass and green for josh smith? RUMORS.
« Reply #78 on: February 17, 2013, 06:59:55 PM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • Satch Sanders
  • *********
  • Posts: 9417
  • Tommy Points: 505
Even if we go with your definition, cost-wise, he's not a third-tier guy. He's probably best suited to be the 5th or 6th best guy on a title team. How much do you wanna pay for that?
Um, no. That's just not true.

The fifth guys on the most recent championship teams were Joel Anthony, DeShawn Stevenson, Ron Artest, and Trevor Ariza.

Forgive me if I'm convinced that Jeff Green is better than every single one of them.
Managing Rilski Sportist to glory at http://www.buzzerbeater.com

Re: Bass and green for josh smith? RUMORS.
« Reply #79 on: February 17, 2013, 07:03:38 PM »

Offline FallGuy

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1941
  • Tommy Points: 70
Even if we go with your definition, cost-wise, he's not a third-tier guy. He's probably best suited to be the 5th or 6th best guy on a title team. How much do you wanna pay for that?
Um, no. That's just not true.

The fifth guys on the most recent championship teams were Joel Anthony, DeShawn Stevenson, Ron Artest, and Trevor Ariza.

Forgive me if I'm convinced that Jeff Green is better than every single one of them.

I think we're at an impasse. Anyway, we'll see how things unfold.

Re: Bass and green for josh smith? RUMORS.
« Reply #80 on: February 17, 2013, 07:05:27 PM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • Satch Sanders
  • *********
  • Posts: 9417
  • Tommy Points: 505
It's surprising how many people are fooled by Green's recent play. The guy's a dud. Has been his whole career.
That's funny, because Green's recent play is indicative of what he's been over most of his career.

His performance with us is to to a large extent an artifact of the role we have for him on the roster.

Dude. I did not say that at all! Don't misquote me!!
So please explain what you said, because I am confused.

I take you to mean that his recent play suggests that he's not a dud, which misleads people -- my answer to this is that his recent play is pretty much indicative of what he's been over the course of his career when given minutes.
This just isn't true kozlodev.

Green's aggregate numbers this year are about what he has had his entire career. His per minute stats are almost exactly the same.

But his recent play, say taking his going back a month(11 games), is not what he has always done. He's much more efficient offensively and he actually is playing very good defense. Over 50% shooting. Over 40% from three. Over 90% from the line while getting to the line by more 1.2 FT per minute. That shows aggression which, once again, he has never been known for.

I am not a fan of Jeff Green's. Heck I have been killing him most of this year. But over his recent stretch, he's been a different player than what he has always been. He's becoming the player some thought he could become.

Then again, its only 11 games and time will tell. He could go into another lackadaisical stretch and even his per minute numbers out like he always has because he is prone to stretches of games of being amazing and then disappearing.
For starters, this wasn't the point of my post.

But even so, he's had months in which he shot 50/40 with 4-5 FTs for ~15-17 pts before. He won't sustain this efficiency level in the long run, but that's fine. Again, that's not the point here.
Managing Rilski Sportist to glory at http://www.buzzerbeater.com

Re: Bass and green for josh smith? RUMORS.
« Reply #81 on: February 17, 2013, 07:20:31 PM »

Offline nickagneta

  • Bob Cousy
  • **************************
  • Posts: 26949
  • Tommy Points: 2004

For starters, this wasn't the point of my post.

But even so, he's had months in which he shot 50/40 with 4-5 FTs for ~15-17 pts before. He won't sustain this efficiency level in the long run, but that's fine. Again, that's not the point here.
I think CC's point was that his recent play, which has been consistent and excellent, fool's people into thinking he is consistent and excellent, which he is not.

You then countered that his recent play is indicative of what Green has been his entire career.

It isn't though. His play this year as a whole is indicative of what Green has been his entire career, but his recent play has been much better than that.

And I agree and I think CC agrees with you that Green won't keep this stretch up. He never does.
2015 CB HISTORICAL DRAFT: COMING THIS OCTOBER
FORMAT:
3 players from 1960-73
3 players from 1974-86
3 players from 1987-00
3 players from 2001-Pres
1 player from any era

 

Hello! Guest

Welcome to the CelticsBlog Forums.

Welcome to CelticsBlog