Author Topic: Do You Think Jeff Green Can Still Be Better,.. Or Just Trade Him For Josh Smith?  (Read 13620 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline KGs Knee

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12749
  • Tommy Points: 1544
They seem like they are different players. Green is more of a scoring 3. Smith is more of an athletic, shot blocking, rebounding four.

I think if we had both we could have the makings of a solid team. (assuming KG and Pierce retire/get traded)

I think it could potentially be a devastating duo, especially when you add in Rondo's game-managing abilities.  The likely-hood of acquiring Smith and keeping Green is slim, though.

I just don't see any trade Atlanta would have interest in that doesn't involve Green.  Signing him as a FA would also be difficult.

In order to make the cap room necessary to sign Smith, the C's would need to amnesty Pierce, clear KG's contract (possibly through retirement), and then also move the contracts of either Bass or Terry+Crawford.  The chances of that happening are, again, very slim.  A S&T would be equally as complicated.

Offline cavman

  • Brad Stevens
  • Posts: 240
  • Tommy Points: 12
I fail to see why anyone would want to trade for Josh Smith. He does not impress me as a player. He reminds me too much of Employee #8- talented but infinitely frustrating.

Green may be inconsistent, but he's not taking tons of stupid shots that hurt his team.
"The most important thing is the ability to communicate.  It's not how much you know.  It's how you communicate what you know."  Red

Offline Evantime34

  • NCE
  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11942
  • Tommy Points: 764
  • Eagerly Awaiting the Next Fantasy Draft
They seem like they are different players. Green is more of a scoring 3. Smith is more of an athletic, shot blocking, rebounding four.

I think if we had both we could have the makings of a solid team. (assuming KG and Pierce retire/get traded)

I think it could potentially be a devastating duo, especially when you add in Rondo's game-managing abilities.  The likely-hood of acquiring Smith and keeping Green is slim, though.

I just don't see any trade Atlanta would have interest in that doesn't involve Green.  Signing him as a FA would also be difficult.

In order to make the cap room necessary to sign Smith, the C's would need to amnesty Pierce, clear KG's contract (possibly through retirement), and then also move the contracts of either Bass or Terry+Crawford.  The chances of that happening are, again, very slim.  A S&T would be equally as complicated.
If Pierce retires (as well as KG) before he is due his guaranteed $5 I believe we would have enough to sign Smith to a large contract.

I agree there is probably no way for a sign and trade to happen.

Here is a question, do you think the length of Smith and Green would allow Sully to play the five spot (giving us a shot blocking presence at the 4 to help cover up a lack of one at the five)
DKC:  Rockets
CB Draft: Memphis Grizz
Players: Klay Thompson, Jabari Parker, Aaron Gordon
Next 3 picks: 4.14, 4.15, 4.19

Offline nickagneta

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 48120
  • Tommy Points: 8794
  • President of Jaylen Brown Fan Club
Not the biggest fan of Green or Smith. But Smith does provide more things this team needs more than Green does and is a better overall player.

Online Atzar

  • Satch Sanders
  • *********
  • Posts: 9091
  • Tommy Points: 1642
Not really interested in trading Green for Smith.  Relative to their contracts, Green is the better value.  There's also an argument to be made that Green could be much more consistent next year, when he's two years removed from surgery and doesn't have the occasional day where he just has no energy.  Even now, you can see days where he just doesn't have it.

I do like Smith, but I'm not sure I'd be willing to part with the pieces it would take to get him.  I think he'd fit very well with our current team.  Trading for him would probably mean trading some of the pieces that I'd like to play in conjunction with him.  Garnett and Green are both in that list, and I think one or the other would have to move in this trade.   

Offline KGs Knee

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12749
  • Tommy Points: 1544
They seem like they are different players. Green is more of a scoring 3. Smith is more of an athletic, shot blocking, rebounding four.

I think if we had both we could have the makings of a solid team. (assuming KG and Pierce retire/get traded)

I think it could potentially be a devastating duo, especially when you add in Rondo's game-managing abilities.  The likely-hood of acquiring Smith and keeping Green is slim, though.

I just don't see any trade Atlanta would have interest in that doesn't involve Green.  Signing him as a FA would also be difficult.

In order to make the cap room necessary to sign Smith, the C's would need to amnesty Pierce, clear KG's contract (possibly through retirement), and then also move the contracts of either Bass or Terry+Crawford.  The chances of that happening are, again, very slim.  A S&T would be equally as complicated.
If Pierce retires (as well as KG) before he is due his guaranteed $5 I believe we would have enough to sign Smith to a large contract.

I agree there is probably no way for a sign and trade to happen.

Here is a question, do you think the length of Smith and Green would allow Sully to play the five spot (giving us a shot blocking presence at the 4 to help cover up a lack of one at the five)

Checking the math a little closer, if Pierce/KG we're cleared from the books, we'd have approx $47m in committed salaries (including 1st rd pick) for 10 roster spots.  Depending on where the actual soft-cap falls (guessing $60m), we'd be pressed to offer him his current contract.  So, I guess we could offer him up to $15m if we simply moved Crawford for a pick.  If the cap goes up, it makes it easier.

I'm just not even remotely convinced KG is retiring, nor Pierce being amnestied.

As to your last point, no I do not think Sully should be playing center.  He'd be one heck of a bench big, though.  I'd let him build his value, and possibly seek to move him for a big, defensive center type (not necessarily elite, but above-average).

Offline Bankshot

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7540
  • Tommy Points: 632
Eh, I wouldn't trade Green for Smith.  However, I would like to have both of them on the Celtics.  How can we sign Smith and keep Green?
"If somebody would have told you when he was playing with the Knicks that Nate Robinson was going to change a big time game and he was going to do it mostly because of his defense, somebody would have got slapped."  Mark Jackson

Offline indeedproceed

  • In The Rafters
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 42583
  • Tommy Points: 2756
  • You ain't the boss of the freakin' bedclothes.
I'm a big Josh Smith guy but I would rather have Jeff Green. Green makes less bone headed plays, takes less bad shots and is going to make a lot less money.
I'd rather have the impact shot blocking, rebounding, and other non-scoring contributions.

But giving him the max, blah.

Yeah, on paper, Smith looks like an obvious 'yes'.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&p1=smithjo03&y1=2013&p2=greenje02&y2=2013

Per-minute, identical scoring, identical FG%, identical FTA's with JG having an edge in 3pt% and FT%, and Josh Smith being better literally everywhere else.

  There's a pretty big difference (12% or so) in TS%, and the turnovers favor Jeff as well. Smith might get the edge, but it's pretty slight.

I disagree, its actually a 6% difference in TS%, and turnovers only favor Green by 2% on turnover ratio (which is very slight when you figure in that Smith also has a higher Usage rate, assist ratio, and 3 more FGA's per 36 minutes).

But Smith has advantages in all the other categories, despite a worse supporting cast, despite teams more aggressively game-planning for him (and despite them being much more familiar with him as a centerpiece of the offense so having literally years to prepare for him).

Plus, Smith has a much bigger impact than Green on defense. Just a better player, and Smith is only 3/4 a year older than Green.

Quote
  Smallish sample size, but if Green keeps playing at his post all-star level next season which player would you say is more likely to be a 2014 all-star? I'd actually go with Green.

This is a tossup for me. All-star voters like sexy stories and points. If the C's are in playoff contention again, and Green is averaging between 18 and 20 ppg with the same FG/3pt numbers, while Smith is still on the Hawks, and they're still middle of the pack, I could see Green getting the nod.

"You've gotta respect a 15-percent 3-point shooter. A guy
like that is always lethal." - Evan 'The God' Turner

Offline Who

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 47112
  • Tommy Points: 2401
Eh, I wouldn't trade Green for Smith.  However, I would like to have both of them on the Celtics.  How can we sign Smith and keep Green?
Sullinger and two first round picks might get it done.

Matching salaries looks a tough nut to crack. Jeez, I think you might have to give up Pierce or KG in order to send an expiring contract back Atlanta's way. The lack of an expiring contract here is a real draw back.

I imagine Atlanta would rather just keep their cap space than take Bass' + C.Lee's contracts in order to get Sully and two first rounders. Not sure there is enough incentive there for Atlanta. Sullinger hasn't shown enough yet. Tough sell.

Offline nickagneta

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 48120
  • Tommy Points: 8794
  • President of Jaylen Brown Fan Club
Actually think Smith ends up in Atlanta. Portland, GSW and some other clubs also seem to have a lot more assets that Atlanta would want to offer for Smith than Boston does

Online jambr380

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12998
  • Tommy Points: 1755
  • Everybody knows what's best for you
I fail to see why anyone would want to trade for Josh Smith. He does not impress me as a player. He reminds me too much of Employee #8- talented but infinitely frustrating.

Green may be inconsistent, but he's not taking tons of stupid shots that hurt his team.


The major difference between the two being that Antoine was a great leader and motivator - kind of the opposite of Josh Smith. Antoine used his emotion to carry his team on his back and will them to victory.

As for Smith, I have said it several times before, but I don't think there is anyway that anybody is going to give him the max. Just because he wants it doesn't mean he is going to get it. He received his current contract based on potential and hasn't done anything to prove he should get more than that same 13 million. But, yes, I would gladly take him on the Celtics, although I, too, would like him to play with Green.

Offline bobbyv

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 522
  • Tommy Points: 32
Eh, I wouldn't trade Green for Smith.  However, I would like to have both of them on the Celtics.  How can we sign Smith and keep Green?
I think KG and Pierce would both have to retire for that to happen

Offline GreenFaith1819

  • NCE
  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15402
  • Tommy Points: 2785
Haven't read the entire thread, but with what we've seen from Jeff Green the last few weeks we'd be completely foolish to trade him - even for Josh Smith.

Jeff Green is just now scratching the surface of what he can do.

I'd rather ride this train with Super 8 and see where it goes.

Offline BballTim

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23724
  • Tommy Points: 1123
I'm a big Josh Smith guy but I would rather have Jeff Green. Green makes less bone headed plays, takes less bad shots and is going to make a lot less money.
I'd rather have the impact shot blocking, rebounding, and other non-scoring contributions.

But giving him the max, blah.

Yeah, on paper, Smith looks like an obvious 'yes'.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&p1=smithjo03&y1=2013&p2=greenje02&y2=2013

Per-minute, identical scoring, identical FG%, identical FTA's with JG having an edge in 3pt% and FT%, and Josh Smith being better literally everywhere else.

  There's a pretty big difference (12% or so) in TS%, and the turnovers favor Jeff as well. Smith might get the edge, but it's pretty slight.

I disagree, its actually a 6% difference in TS%, and turnovers only favor Green by 2% on turnover ratio (which is very slight when you figure in that Smith also has a higher Usage rate, assist ratio, and 3 more FGA's per 36 minutes).

But Smith has advantages in all the other categories, despite a worse supporting cast, despite teams more aggressively game-planning for him (and despite them being much more familiar with him as a centerpiece of the offense so having literally years to prepare for him).

Plus, Smith has a much bigger impact than Green on defense. Just a better player, and Smith is only 3/4 a year older than Green.

Quote
  Smallish sample size, but if Green keeps playing at his post all-star level next season which player would you say is more likely to be a 2014 all-star? I'd actually go with Green.

This is a tossup for me. All-star voters like sexy stories and points. If the C's are in playoff contention again, and Green is averaging between 18 and 20 ppg with the same FG/3pt numbers, while Smith is still on the Hawks, and they're still middle of the pack, I could see Green getting the nod.

  When I said the TS% difference was 12% I meant that Green's number was 12% higher than Smith's, meaning if they both took the same number of shots Green would end up with 12% more points. That 6% difference is pretty significant btw. It's the difference in scoring efficiency between Rondo and Chris Paul for their careers. Also, the usage% doesn't mitigate the TO%, it exacerbates it. Smith is both using more possessions than Green and turning it over more often per possession used.

  Also, I'm not sure what your "all star" comment was supposed to mean. You talk about all-star voters liking points, but the 18-20 a game you have Green scoring would be pretty close to what you might expect from Smith. Also you talk about the Celts being in playoff contention again while the Hawks are "middle of the pack" again. But the Hawks are generally a 4-5 seed in the playoffs. ??

Offline indeedproceed

  • In The Rafters
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 42583
  • Tommy Points: 2756
  • You ain't the boss of the freakin' bedclothes.
I'm a big Josh Smith guy but I would rather have Jeff Green. Green makes less bone headed plays, takes less bad shots and is going to make a lot less money.
I'd rather have the impact shot blocking, rebounding, and other non-scoring contributions.

But giving him the max, blah.

Yeah, on paper, Smith looks like an obvious 'yes'.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&p1=smithjo03&y1=2013&p2=greenje02&y2=2013

Per-minute, identical scoring, identical FG%, identical FTA's with JG having an edge in 3pt% and FT%, and Josh Smith being better literally everywhere else.

  There's a pretty big difference (12% or so) in TS%, and the turnovers favor Jeff as well. Smith might get the edge, but it's pretty slight.

I disagree, its actually a 6% difference in TS%, and turnovers only favor Green by 2% on turnover ratio (which is very slight when you figure in that Smith also has a higher Usage rate, assist ratio, and 3 more FGA's per 36 minutes).

But Smith has advantages in all the other categories, despite a worse supporting cast, despite teams more aggressively game-planning for him (and despite them being much more familiar with him as a centerpiece of the offense so having literally years to prepare for him).

Plus, Smith has a much bigger impact than Green on defense. Just a better player, and Smith is only 3/4 a year older than Green.

Quote
  Smallish sample size, but if Green keeps playing at his post all-star level next season which player would you say is more likely to be a 2014 all-star? I'd actually go with Green.

This is a tossup for me. All-star voters like sexy stories and points. If the C's are in playoff contention again, and Green is averaging between 18 and 20 ppg with the same FG/3pt numbers, while Smith is still on the Hawks, and they're still middle of the pack, I could see Green getting the nod.

  When I said the TS% difference was 12% I meant that Green's number was 12% higher than Smith's, meaning if they both took the same number of shots Green would end up with 12% more points. That 6% difference is pretty significant btw. It's the difference in scoring efficiency between Rondo and Chris Paul for their careers.

lol. So you took JG's 56%, subtracted Smith's 50%, and divided that remaining 6% by 50% to get 12%?

You couldn't just say, "Green's TS% is higher by 6%"?

I didn't say it wasn't significant, JG shooting 40% from 3 is huge. Its game-changer for him huge. But his eFG% is also less than 2% higher, the operative difference being that Josh Smith's FT shooting this season is well below his career average. That's why Green's TS% is 6% higher, when the FG% are identical, even with Green's higher 3pt %.

And let's not talk about Rondo and Chris Paul.

Quote
Also, the usage% doesn't mitigate the TO%, it exacerbates it. Smith is both using more possessions than Green and turning it over more often per possession used.

Turnover ratio is not one of those numbers that a 2% difference means anything significant though. Those numbers do exist, but its not turnover ratio.

And in this instance, if Jeff Green had the same usage rate as Josh Smith, their turnovers per 36 minutes would be so close its negligible.

EDIT: I should say I'm oversimplifying 'Usage' here. Usage (Tim knows this already, but for those who don't) doesn't actually measure the % of time a player has the ball in their hands, it measures how often a player commits a possession-ending event, which is either a field goal attempt, turnover, or assist. The implication is that the more often a player commits these events, the more often they have the ball in their hands during decision-making moments, so a higher-usage is roughly equivalent with more time spent with the ball in their hands.

Quote
  Also, I'm not sure what your "all star" comment was supposed to mean. You talk about all-star voters liking points, but the 18-20 a game you have Green scoring would be pretty close to what you might expect from Smith. Also you talk about the Celts being in playoff contention again while the Hawks are "middle of the pack" again. But the Hawks are generally a 4-5 seed in the playoffs. ??

Right. I'm saying, Josh Smith has been doing this for years, 2nd team all-defense effort on his resume, career year last year, etc..he's never gotten the nod, so unless he goes to a new team and changes the perception of him, I could see how Josh Smith could continue to put in very good production and continue to miss out on all-star games.


"You've gotta respect a 15-percent 3-point shooter. A guy
like that is always lethal." - Evan 'The God' Turner