Author Topic: "Assets"  (Read 5693 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: "Assets"
« Reply #30 on: July 13, 2014, 12:06:43 PM »

Offline Tr1boy

  • Paul Pierce
  • ***************************
  • Posts: 27260
  • Tommy Points: 867
Green shot what 41 percent (fg)? That is a horrible stat for a sf.

Green is a 6th man at best. Like thornton. Productive in spurts and brings nothing to the table half the game

Green will have a players option for next season. Cant see him picking that up and wanting money like hayward. He is a goner sooner or later

Re: "Assets"
« Reply #31 on: July 13, 2014, 01:02:23 PM »

Offline GreenWarrior

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3275
  • Tommy Points: 228
I don't see what's so hard to understand. we need green to be the man and he's not, he's a 6th man playing as a starter. there's nothing wrong with that, jamal Crawford has made a career out of it. 

Re: "Assets"
« Reply #32 on: July 13, 2014, 01:11:13 PM »

Offline Future Celtics Owner

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3097
  • Tommy Points: 191
  • Celtic's only raise championship Banners
it's a word that's come up since last yr. and will for quite some time. I think we have a lot of 'em, from expiring contracts in the next couple yrs. to draft picks that aren't protected that could potentially be very high picks. a few young guys that aren't anything yet but in a couple yrs. they could be considered assets. or by that time they could be considered cornerstones. 

and finally Rondo. the only player right now possibly worth anything on this roster and even that is minimal because of the injury. if he struggles this yr. he will be worthless and not even worth trading.

are all of these actually assets anymore? I think they should have been but no one else in the league did or doesn't apparently. they're only assets if someone else value's them. so what the H are we doing? I think it's time Danny just lowers the asking price(if there is one) for guys like green, bass & Wallace and just be done with them, they're nothing, they do nothing for this team's present or future.

 

Bass would probably be gone if Danny got offered anything of remote value in return, but there is no real point in giving him away for nothing  because he is an expiring contact this year anyway...if nobody wants him, may as well let his contact expire and come off the books next offseason.

Wallace is useless.  He only in his early 30's, but he looks and plays like he's 38.  He's just coming off a major injury.  He cannot score to save his life, and is a turnover beast.  He has become an average rebounder.  His defense is now is merely 'decent' - even that isn't good enough for him to earn a legit role on a team.  The guy is owed $10M this year and next.  We just need to accept, he's not going anywhere.  No team is taking that contract unless we basically PAY them to take it by offering them so many assets that they can't say no - basically exactly what Brooklyn did to convince us to take him.  We may as well keep him.  Next year he one year from now he becomes a $10M expiring contact and should be pretty easy to move, so all we need to do is put up with him for one season.

Green is far from useless on this team, and I'm starting to get the feeling (more and more) that he is the most undervalued playeron this roster.  True, he's on a $9M contract and we could use cap space.  True, he's no superstar.  True, he's not 19 years old.  So what? Green is still the best offensive player on this team until somebody (Olynyk? Smart? Thornton? Bradley?) rises up and takes that position.  He's still the only guy on this team who can legitimately defend guys like Lebron, Melo and Durant.  He's still one of the only guys on the team who has not missed a single game in the 2-3 seasons.  He's still the only starting calibre SF we have on this team.  Considering all of the above, $9M is a relatively modest amout.  It's not enough cap space to bring in a star, and anybody that we could sign for $9M (or get in return for Green) would likely be no better than Green.  Even Lance Stephenson (It's arguable whether he is better than Green) wants over $10M.  Avery Bradley just got $8M. Deng is likely to get $10M and is no better than Green.  Basically he is the best player available at the SF position for his price tag, and he's a good locker room guy who can hit big shots...may as well keep him.
I completely agree with you about green. We def can trade him, if we want, for something to a team that needs a sf. He's not dead weight. I thought there were plentiful good sf's but when u look at the stats Green is right up there,,,and thats when he was playing lousy. Im still holding out that he takes a step in his game this year......i hope!

Re: "Assets"
« Reply #33 on: July 13, 2014, 01:44:25 PM »

Offline 86MaxwellSmart

  • NCE
  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3821
  • Tommy Points: 378
"Assets"....Ainge used to call then "Chips" back in 2005-2007.

Speaking of Jeff Green---with his athleticism, he would be a Top 10 player in this league, if he came to play every night....Sad.
Larry Bird was Greater than you think.

Re: "Assets"
« Reply #34 on: July 13, 2014, 01:56:30 PM »

Offline LilRip

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6857
  • Tommy Points: 391
Green is severely underrated on this board. Dude is a starting caliber SF. He's far from the best but we're not paying him max contract money either.

Wallace and Bass, i could do without.

Green is not a starter. we saw his best when he was a scoring threat coming off the bench on a veteran, contending team. that's what he is.

Because Pierce is a perennial all-star and a HoF-er.

Just because a player isn't an all-star doesn't mean he's not a quality starter. Just because he can't carry a team offensively night in and night out doesn't mean he's not a quality starter. Jeff Green is pretty much in the middle ground of starting SF's. He's not in the top 10 but he's definitely in the top 20.

just because a guy explodes for 40 games once or twice a season doesn't make him a starter. the point I was trying to make with green was he's a more effective player coming off the bench on a veteran team. he's not a starter in this league, he's better suited as a 6th man and there's nothing wrong with that.That's what I thought. So our only chance would be if Phil Jackson of all people would trade Melo within his division to the celtics with minimal return.

Green is easily a starting caliber forward in this league. Im surprised anyone would even debate this. Both his offense and his defense are starting caliber levels. We also have him at a good price compared to what other players are getting this summer.

Now of you are trying to compare him to players that average 18-20 points per game, then you are wrong on your definition of starting caliber. Those players are all-stars, which Green is not. There are no teams in modern nba history that start 5 all-stars.

Yeah I would say Green's best role is sixth man as he doesn't rebound or pass well for his position. He is a streaky scorer and a good man defender, perfect guy to pull off the bench. Also, Detroit came close to starting 5 all stars, they had four one year didn't they? As did we one year.

Coming close to starting 5 all-stars is not the same as starting 5 all-stars.

Besides, Prince was the odd man out of that Pistons team and he was a starting caliber SF. On that year, he averaged 14.4ppg, 4.3rpg, 2.3apg, 0.8spg and 0.5bpg per 36 minutes.

You know which Celtic posted similar (if not slightly better) stats to Prince? I'll give you one guess.



Then I guess the term "starting caliber" doesn't really mean all that much. We should be talking about his role on the team or what "option" he is, which I know is a term a lot of poster hate around here as well. I think the point stands though, that Green is not suited to be a teams go to guy. Green is a streaky scorer who I don't think should be relied upon as one of a teams top players.

Starting caliber means a player is productive and not a scrub, and that he can be trusted with heavy minutes. The point does indeed stand that he's not a team's go to guy, but that point was never debated in the first place. I don't know why you and GW seem to equate "starter" with "guy who can be a team's go to guy". You must think guys like Batum and Deng and Kawhi Leonard are probably better off as 6th men as well. Y'know, guys who can't be the go to guys of their team. Tack on Parsons and Hayward to that list too.

Point is, Jeff Green is quite underrated on this board, especially now that he's being lumped in with Wallace and Bass. I get that he thus far has severely disappointed in filling the shoes of Paul Pierce (a surefire HoF-er and one of the best C's players in history), but he's fairly productive in his own right. When we say he's a top15-20 SF in this league, that means he's still better than the starting SFs half of the other teams have, and he's better than everyone's SF's on the bench.

- LilRip

Re: "Assets"
« Reply #35 on: July 13, 2014, 02:00:41 PM »

Offline LilRip

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6857
  • Tommy Points: 391
I don't see what's so hard to understand. we need green to be the man and he's not, he's a 6th man playing as a starter. there's nothing wrong with that, jamal Crawford has made a career out of it.

and yet Jamal Crawford plays starter minutes so he's basically a starter masquerading as a 6th man.

Hmm, I wonder if the Clippers would trade away Jamal Crawford "for just about anything"? Maybe we can get him for a Babb and a 2016 2nd rounder  ;) and i quote:

dumping bass, green & Wallace for just about anything isn't panicking. it's getting better by subtraction.

- LilRip