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.