If Stevens and staff can somehow develop Jeff Green to accept a 1st or 2nd option offensive role for next year, it isn't out of the realm of possibility that Jeff increases the produce to 20-22/6-7/3-4/1/1 on a more likely lower shooting efficiency.
What the heavens was his role last season then? And how do you "develop someone to accept" a role they don't have the mentality to take on? His FG% already dipped to .412 last season, now you're saying he'll have a "lower shooting efficiency"? If he shoots 39%, how is that helping the team?
Read my previous post again. Remember, reading comprehenision is your friend.
Don't go putting words in other people's mouths.
What were the efficiency numbers I mentioned in my previous post? You brought up Jeff Green's last season's efficiency numbers.
1 season is too small of a sample size to make a sound determination. Jeff Green's entire Boston Celtic's body of work is a more accurate representation of his play, as a Celtic.
My point of emphasis was if Jeff Green were able to increase his statistical production above his past Celtic career production, it most likely would be made at the cost of his past Celtics career shooting efficiency.
This focus on Jeff Green or on Rondo's future are all too "besides" the significant point.
The significant point is how does our coaching staff elevate how the team produces and performs as a solid unit.
I am certain throwing together a collection of more rookies, 2nd or 3rd year players.....and throwing them all out to the "wolves" is not the best way for a virtually NBA "rookie" coaching staff to mess around with.
I do not envy Brad's job. He's pretty much the "scapegoat". But not by me. I am placing the majority of responsibility on Danny Ainge & C's front office.
Brad is not really receiving a "fair shake"......but I know in my heart that...."that's life".