An interesting view on Jeff Green from other celtics fans online.

[jdz101]

I have a look over on the Celtics RealGM forum occasionally and I noticed some numbers on their game-threads that surprised me a little.

They do something called the "Victory Cigar" which is a vote after each win that judges the best Celtics player on the night.

Here is the tally for this season so far.

Victory Cigar Count

Pierce (11)
Green (7)
Rondo (6)
KG (5)
Sullinger (3)
Bass (1)
Bradley (1)
Terry (1)

Jeff Green has the second most cigars out of all the celtics.

What do you guys think of those numbers?

[lightspeed5]

ive read that board before, and theyre usually spot on in those polls. jeff green had a stretch where he scorched opponents 2nd units... he probably won those games for us

I'm a little surprised that AB only got 1 victory cigar. good job to sully for winning us 3 games. what an advanced rookie.

[jdz101]

Well the defensive monsters are definitely underrated in wins that is for sure. Especially considering KG and Bradley only have 6 cigars combined.

I just found it very interesting that green had the second most. A pretty polarizing player among fans. Perhaps even more so than rondo.

[connor]

I've never seen that before, but its really interesting. I really like the concept of identifying the difference maker in wins right after the game. Its nice to look back on.

I don't know how accurate overall those numbers are but I think they are probably skewed towards who has the most standout night rather than being indicative of who was the best player on the night.

The top three guys being Pierce, Rondo and Green are obviously all deserving, but their impact is far more recognizable during the game and on the stat sheet than some of our other key cogs.

KG and Bradley both probably deserve more than what they've been given, but their value is on the defensive end which often goes more unnoticed than when Green drops 15-20 on the second unit, Pierce goes on one of his 15 point runs, or Rondo flirts with a triple double.

Big ups to Sully though for getting 3 cigars, if you asked me at the beginning of the season I would have said that would have been great production for him for the entire year and he did it in half a season.

[CelticConcourse]

Usually, it's  team effort so it's hard to single out one player. Especially in a game where multiple clutch shots were made (DEN). What game did Bass win us? I'm sure everyone on this forum but me thinks it's a typo 

[Fan from VT]

I often hate those "key player" polls because they tend to ignore the overall, steady impact of the true key player to look for a single "game changing" play.


For example, those polls often reward a bench player averaging 5 points per game if that player scores 14 in a close win, because this unique outburst "won" us the game. But it ignores the fact we still would have lost the game without the steady (and still better) 17/5/4 from Pierce and the All-NBA defense from KG that comes every night.

Basically, those polls take the truly important players for granted, then look for reasons to reward lesser players for interesting variation in performance.

[jdz101]

Usually, it's  team effort so it's hard to single out one player. Especially in a game where multiple clutch shots were made (DEN). What game did Bass win us? I'm sure everyone on this forum but me thinks it's a typo 

I'd say it would be the game against chicago where it was the most disgusting offensive display of the season and Brandon scored 10 or 15 out of the 70 or so that won the game.

[jdz101]

I often hate those "key player" polls because they tend to ignore the overall, steady impact of the true key player to look for a single "game changing" play.


For example, those polls often reward a bench player averaging 5 points per game if that player scores 14 in a close win, because this unique outburst "won" us the game. But it ignores the fact we still would have lost the game without the steady (and still better) 17/5/4 from Pierce and the All-NBA defense from KG that comes every night.

Basically, those polls take the truly important players for granted, then look for reasons to reward lesser players for interesting variation in performance.

When I first looked at the victory cigar on that forum I would have tended to agree with you. After then looking at it for a while longer it actually does seem that most of the voters go for the real difference maker in the game or the player that contributed in the most important way or at the most important time. Its actually not a bad poll to do if you have intelligent, reasonable voters.

[connor]

I often hate those "key player" polls because they tend to ignore the overall, steady impact of the true key player to look for a single "game changing" play.


For example, those polls often reward a bench player averaging 5 points per game if that player scores 14 in a close win, because this unique outburst "won" us the game. But it ignores the fact we still would have lost the game without the steady (and still better) 17/5/4 from Pierce and the All-NBA defense from KG that comes every night.

Basically, those polls take the truly important players for granted, then look for reasons to reward lesser players for interesting variation in performance.

I don't know if that is necessarily taking the important players for granted. We have certain expectations for each individual player on the roster. For example Pierce is basically averaging the numbers you quoted there, thats what I expect out of him.

Now that doesn't mean that if he doesn't produce more than that he can't be the guy who "won" the game, but if another guy's play far exceeds my expectations then he is going to get more recognition from me. If Bradley or Terry put up 20 (double what they average), its going to get noticed and it should be.

Generally it will be easier for a bench guy to exceed my expectations because I expect less from them, but I think an impressive performance from one of our stars will usually overshadow any above average night from a bench guy. 

As jdz101 said, if you have intelligent and reasonable voters they can use the eyeball test and choose based on more than just stats, recognizing guys who added that extra energy, came up with big stops, big shots and that x factor that put us over the top, regardless if they are a starter or from the end of the bench.

[nickagneta]

Green seems to have a huge fanboy following here in Boston. Why? I'm not sure but all three of my boys love the guy and I am clueless as to why.

Is it because they love the comeback from heart surgery story?
Is it that he is a super athletic player and they like those type of players?
Is it because they want to see more awesome dunks?

Not sure but his following appears to be pretty loyal regardless of how he plays(and let's face it he wasn't playing very well for at least half of this season.

So color me skeptical if I don't think these fans are any more intelligent, perceptive or knowledgeable about how well Jeff green has played this year or his importance to the team.

I mean thinking Jeff Green has been better or more important than KG or Rondo this year is just plain silly IMHO.

I wish IP still did his CVeltics MVP award after every game. I bet our numbers here at CB would reflect Pierce, KG, Rondo and maybe Sullinger being more important to winning games than they would have Green.

[fairweatherfan]

It helps that Green hasn't had that many mediocre games.  He's had some awful games and some excellent games, and not all that many in the middle.  So I can see how he'd do well in a poll like this.  The frequent thunderdunks don't hurt either.

Contrast that to KG who's much more consistent.  Much more important to the team but less likely to be singled out as the best player in a game.

[kgainez]

Green seems to have a huge fanboy following here in Boston. Why? I'm not sure but all three of my boys love the guy and I am clueless as to why.

Is it because they love the comeback from heart surgery story?
Is it that he is a super athletic player and they like those type of players?
Is it because they want to see more awesome dunks?

Not sure but his following appears to be pretty loyal regardless of how he plays(and let's face it he wasn't playing very well for at least half of this season.

So color me skeptical if I don't think these fans are any more intelligent, perceptive or knowledgeable about how well Jeff green has played this year or his importance to the team.

I mean thinking Jeff Green has been better or more important than KG or Rondo this year is just plain silly IMHO.

I wish IP still did his CVeltics MVP award after every game. I bet our numbers here at CB would reflect Pierce, KG, Rondo and maybe Sullinger being more important to winning games than they would have Green.

as a Jeff Green fan girl, I'll try to help you out from both perspectives.
Of course the heart thing i kind of amazing. I'll spare the details, but it's hard to root against that type of 'story line'.

I think a lot of us see his potential. And when he has great games that include wonderful highlights I think it tickles our fancy. I think giving a guy 9 million over 4 years says that we're investing in his future, and obviously we just want the guy to do well and keep growing.

He's no Paul Pierce, but stick him around a guy like Rondo and I still like our chances in the future. Jeff could pull rebounds better and assist better as well, but I think overall he's got a good game that has tons of potential. And if he ever reaches that, in that future, for this club, I'm sure many others will jump on the bandwagon

As far as the victory cigars, I think, for me, I see JG really as the head of the bench. I know he doesn't come in straight off the bench (usually behind a KG replacement), if he's on, then we know the rest of the bench gets on. He's a spark...notice when he has a good game, Jet's not too far behind. Our bench has been winning us games.

I mean, we came from a point in time where it wasn't farfetched to see our bench of last year score less than 10 points. Now it's not uncommon for the bench to score half the points in a game. I think that's huge and that has to do with Jeff. When he's making his shots and being aggressive, not only are defenders committing to him more creating open shots for others, but he's really a spark. We don't get many athletic dunkers on Celtics teams.

So...I think that. 7 cigars...I'll take it. I mean, after all, guy is our 3rd leading scorer.

[Fan from VT]

I often hate those "key player" polls because they tend to ignore the overall, steady impact of the true key player to look for a single "game changing" play.


For example, those polls often reward a bench player averaging 5 points per game if that player scores 14 in a close win, because this unique outburst "won" us the game. But it ignores the fact we still would have lost the game without the steady (and still better) 17/5/4 from Pierce and the All-NBA defense from KG that comes every night.

Basically, those polls take the truly important players for granted, then look for reasons to reward lesser players for interesting variation in performance.

I don't know if that is necessarily taking the important players for granted. We have certain expectations for each individual player on the roster. For example Pierce is basically averaging the numbers you quoted there, thats what I expect out of him.

Now that doesn't mean that if he doesn't produce more than that he can't be the guy who "won" the game, but if another guy's play far exceeds my expectations then he is going to get more recognition from me. If Bradley or Terry put up 20 (double what they average), its going to get noticed and it should be.

Generally it will be easier for a bench guy to exceed my expectations because I expect less from them, but I think an impressive performance from one of our stars will usually overshadow any above average night from a bench guy. 

As jdz101 said, if you have intelligent and reasonable voters they can use the eyeball test and choose based on more than just stats, recognizing guys who added that extra energy, came up with big stops, big shots and that x factor that put us over the top, regardless if they are a starter or from the end of the bench.

I think you actually articulated exactly why I think those polls favor bench/role players. A guy can exceed his usual impact by 300% and still have less actual impact than PP or KG, but because it was so unexpected, it gets the "difference maker" credit. But take KG or PP off the floor, and it doesn't matter what the role player does, because we just lose. So those polls are specifically designed to reward whichever player has their "good" night (and there's always a role player that steps up, it just changes who it is) without recognizing that most role player "good" nights are still not as good or important as the contribution from your reliable star.

[connor]

I often hate those "key player" polls because they tend to ignore the overall, steady impact of the true key player to look for a single "game changing" play.


For example, those polls often reward a bench player averaging 5 points per game if that player scores 14 in a close win, because this unique outburst "won" us the game. But it ignores the fact we still would have lost the game without the steady (and still better) 17/5/4 from Pierce and the All-NBA defense from KG that comes every night.

Basically, those polls take the truly important players for granted, then look for reasons to reward lesser players for interesting variation in performance.

I don't know if that is necessarily taking the important players for granted. We have certain expectations for each individual player on the roster. For example Pierce is basically averaging the numbers you quoted there, thats what I expect out of him.

Now that doesn't mean that if he doesn't produce more than that he can't be the guy who "won" the game, but if another guy's play far exceeds my expectations then he is going to get more recognition from me. If Bradley or Terry put up 20 (double what they average), its going to get noticed and it should be.

Generally it will be easier for a bench guy to exceed my expectations because I expect less from them, but I think an impressive performance from one of our stars will usually overshadow any above average night from a bench guy. 

As jdz101 said, if you have intelligent and reasonable voters they can use the eyeball test and choose based on more than just stats, recognizing guys who added that extra energy, came up with big stops, big shots and that x factor that put us over the top, regardless if they are a starter or from the end of the bench.

I think you actually articulated exactly why I think those polls favor bench/role players. A guy can exceed his usual impact by 300% and still have less actual impact than PP or KG, but because it was so unexpected, it gets the "difference maker" credit. But take KG or PP off the floor, and it doesn't matter what the role player does, because we just lose. So those polls are specifically designed to reward whichever player has their "good" night (and there's always a role player that steps up, it just changes who it is) without recognizing that most role player "good" nights are still not as good or important as the contribution from your reliable star.

Well if you look at the numbers they don't really back your argument up. I admit Green's numbers are inflated, but he has played some of the best ball of his career coming off of heart surgery so people are probably overvaluing his impact. Outside of him though KG, Rondo and Pierce have pretty much all of the "cigars" (other than Sully and I think he deserves his 3). If it really overvalued bench players that much, why don't more have "cigars"?

A few of Green's should probably be reallocated to KG and probably Bradley, but other than that it seems like our reliable stars are valued just fine. As I said I think an impressive night from one of our stars is going to overshadow an impressive night from a bench guy and the numbers back that up.