Jeff Green

[BballTim]

Pretty small sample size for that level of criticism.

Huh, what?

The criticism is directed towards his play in this series. You can even criticize a player's game. What's the problem? Small sample size? I don't' think you know what you're talking about. You cant' say a guy had a bad quarter, or a bad game, or a bad series, because the sample size is small? Hahaha, sorry, that's pathetic theory. Sample size would be relevant if someone was saying "Jeff Green is a 33 FG% shooter, he doesn't belong in the NBA".

  Huh, what?

  You don't understand that 4 games is a small sample size?

  By the way, this conversation has been hovering between his play during the playoffs and his play since joining the Celts.

  Learn to read more carefully, maybe?

What conversation? My point is that he played poorly in these 4 games. Do you agree or disagree?

  Sure, he played poorly this series. But it's still too small a sample size to claim he's not fulfilling his role on the team.

Yeah, I'll claim he has played poorly this series, hence he's fulfilled his role poorly this series. Is that okay with you? Let me know.

  Lighten up, Francis.

[winsomme]

Pretty small sample size for that level of criticism.

Huh, what?

The criticism is directed towards his play in this series. You can even criticize a player's game. What's the problem? Small sample size? I don't' think you know what you're talking about. You cant' say a guy had a bad quarter, or a bad game, or a bad series, because the sample size is small? Hahaha, sorry, that's pathetic theory. Sample size would be relevant if someone was saying "Jeff Green is a 33 FG% shooter, he doesn't belong in the NBA".

  Huh, what?

  You don't understand that 4 games is a small sample size?

  By the way, this conversation has been hovering between his play during the playoffs and his play since joining the Celts.

  Learn to read more carefully, maybe?

What conversation? My point is that he played poorly in these 4 games. Do you agree or disagree?

  Sure, he played poorly this series. But it's still too small a sample size to claim he's not fulfilling his role on the team.

Yeah, I'll claim he has played poorly this series, hence he's fulfilled his role poorly this series. Is that okay with you? Let me know.

  Lighten up, Francis.

"If I catch any of you guys in my stuff..."

[BballTim]

Pretty small sample size for that level of criticism.

Huh, what?

The criticism is directed towards his play in this series. You can even criticize a player's game. What's the problem? Small sample size? I don't' think you know what you're talking about. You cant' say a guy had a bad quarter, or a bad game, or a bad series, because the sample size is small? Hahaha, sorry, that's pathetic theory. Sample size would be relevant if someone was saying "Jeff Green is a 33 FG% shooter, he doesn't belong in the NBA".

  Huh, what?

  You don't understand that 4 games is a small sample size?

  By the way, this conversation has been hovering between his play during the playoffs and his play since joining the Celts.

  Learn to read more carefully, maybe?

What conversation? My point is that he played poorly in these 4 games. Do you agree or disagree?

  Sure, he played poorly this series. But it's still too small a sample size to claim he's not fulfilling his role on the team.

Yeah, I'll claim he has played poorly this series, hence he's fulfilled his role poorly this series. Is that okay with you? Let me know.

  Lighten up, Francis.

"If I catch any of you guys in my stuff..."

  Haha.

[GreenEnvy]

There will come a time when Green breaks out. He will carry the team. Maybe for a stretch, maybe for a series. Whenever it happens, I will not be surprised in the least bit.

People can hate on him if they want. He will deliver soon enough.

[angryguy77]

There will come a time when Green breaks out. He will carry the team. Maybe for a stretch, maybe for a series. Whenever it happens, I will not be surprised in the least bit.

People can hate on him if they want. He will deliver soon enough.

But then they'll find an excuse for why he's playing good. Much like how the argument changed between the first 2 and last 2 games of the Knicks series.

I agree with your post entirely. He will prove a lot of people wrong here.

[Senninsage]

People are seriously not giving Jeff Green enough credit. Great basketball isn't just about giving us points. The guy has done a good job this series.

He's doing the kinds of things that very often get overlooked on a stat sheet. Key possessions, where he nags an offensive player just enough, where the ball ends up going back to Boston, and then leads to a nice 3 or a score on the other end, to further pad an advantage.

Jeff Green is not getting enough credit. Every single player on this Celtics team, is a large part of this impressive sweep against the Knicks. Take away Jeff Greens very important shots that he hit in Game 1 or Game 2, and who knows what this game 4 means for the Celtics today. It could have just as easily been the Celtics down 2-1, or possibly even playing this game for a 2-2 tie tonight.

Stop thinking about just points.

[Proveo]

Lighten up, Francis.

What? Not sure what you mean by that.

Anyway, I was just trying to explain to you why and how your point that "you can't say a player played poorly in 4 games because the sample is small" was silly. I think you finally got it.

[jdub1660]

I remember reading someone pointing out all these missed opportunities for him to drive in for Alley oops and etc. But I think JGreen read that b/c this game I saw him moving alot without the ball. And 2 possessions(1 where Pierce had turned his back to the basket then kicked it back to Ray at the top of the key. Green was right under the basket WIDE open.

Either way, he is under performing for his talent level or I should say talent ability. Maybe he'll pick it up next round versus James Jones/Mike Miller

[Kuberski1]

Agree, he has looked better in the last 2 games.  He does score, often on free throws.  He draws attention from the defense, which gives other guys opportunities.  He can give all the rest that Doc wants to give Pierce and Allen.  He can play very good offensive players say 6-9 and under, such as Carmelo, and go a good job on them.  He will be important vs the Heat....

[BballTim]

Lighten up, Francis.

What? Not sure what you mean by that.

Anyway, I was just trying to explain to you why and how your point that "you can't say a player played poorly in 4 games because the sample is small" was silly. I think you finally got it.

  I think I got that you don't get that 4 games is a small sample size.

  And my point wasn't "you can't say a player played poorly in 4 games because the sample is small". It was more that you can't say a player isn't filling his role on a team based on 4 games.

[ImShakHeIsShaq]

Tell me this, if Green has been so bad, why did Doc leave him in like another 5 mins after he had like 2 t/os in a row (got blocked like 2xs too) today? I don't think people realize how well he played D on Melo... he was terrible on offense yet Doc chose not to bring PP in anyway. That kid played good D that went unnoticed on Melo... of course I want his shot to fall more but hey, at least he has been more aggressive since game 2... his shot will fall eventually!

[dtrader]

I agree that Green played some pretty tough D on Melo. He was really active in that respect.

[Proveo]

Lighten up, Francis.

What? Not sure what you mean by that.

Anyway, I was just trying to explain to you why and how your point that "you can't say a player played poorly in 4 games because the sample is small" was silly. I think you finally got it.

  I think I got that you don't get that 4 games is a small sample size.

Are you just trying to troll or something? If so, just say it and I'll save time.

Four games is a small sample size for what? The sample of what? What's the population in this case?

Anyway, he played poorly in those 4 games. I'm not really sure how you can't understand this - player X player poorly in this period - but this has nothing to do with sample size. Sample size is about making inferences (extracting conclusions from a sample to a larger population) and here nobody is making them.

Do you know what an inference is?

[GreenFaith1819]

He had more than enough time to learn his role, the quick hitters and to get comfortable with it all. If there wasn't enough time for him to fit in, Ainge wouldn't have made the trade.

He just needs to step it up and start making those easy shots he's missing and start rebounding the ball. He shot 33% from the floor in this series, this is unacceptable. The rebounding wasn't awful, but against he Knicks he should have done better.

I think Jeff Green is fulfilling the role of bench scorer just fine.

I also think that Doc hasn't really determined what specifically is Jeff's role so that is why Green looks confused out there every other game or so.

Green isn't going to drop 15 - 20 points per night or average 10 rpg like Perk....not gonna happen coming off the bench.

A guy who's scoring 6 ppg in 17 minutes with an efficiency of 33% FG is not fulfilling any scoring role "fine".

0.33 FG% is not fine, is not close to fine, it's not in the same area code of fine, it's not even in the same state. Just not fine at all. If you're convinced that this is fine, you're simply wrong. Not fine, not underwhelming, not mediocre. Just terrible.

So - Proveo...what about Jeff's 7 rebs in 17 minutes? Even though he did not shoot well, I think sometimes we get caught up in how well someone shoots vice what other areas he may contribute in.

What about it? What's exactly your point? His rebounding today was good, in the series overall it wasn't awful - as his shooting - but could have been better, I've already stated that. In game 1 he didn't get a single rebound.

And for "sometimes we get caught up in how well someone shoots vice what other areas he may contribute in", maybe that happens to you, but certainly not to me. As my post mentioning his rebounding shows. Maybe you just missed it? In that one I was refuting a point about his scoring, so of course it didn't make any sense to talk about "other areas".

Learn to read more carefully, maybe?

There are more areas to basketball than scoring. The title of the thread is "Jeff Green"....not "Jeff Green's scoring."

So to me, that leaves the discussion quite open to talk about other areas of his game.

I've explained it but, as it seems you were unable to understand it, I'll explain it again: I did talk about other areas of his game. Not that I needed to do it (the title of the thread is "Jeff Green" and not "Jeff Green: address multiple aspects of his game in every post you make or don't write here"), but I actually mentioned other aspects. Then I addressed a particular one in that post. Do you have a problem with that?

Now again: do you have a legit basketball point to make or not? 

I believe I have made a legit basketball point, Proveo....you obviously have a negative bias towards Jeff Green, and I chose not to.

Okay, this conversation stops here. Getting tired of your rudeness and reckless accusations and assumptions. 

Saying that the guy has played badly in this series and needs to step up his game is not a negative bias towards Jeff Green at all. Is this clear enough?

The rest of your post is beyond pathetic and, once again, you make false assumptions about what I think and my opinions. Who told you that I "don't like Jeff Green" here?

I'm not used to discuss with the kind of person who argues the way you do and I'm certainly not starting now.

And if you cant' deal with people criticizing a basketball player's poor play in a message board, maybe you need to move on to some different thing.

As I've learned over the course of my time here on this blog, the art of discussion is important. If you feel you have a point to make, argue it and don't back down.

I think you started this with your tone towards me, but I bothered not to report you.

After all, it's Resurrection Day.

But as I've attempted to understand your posts, I've responded to them as I saw fit - without disrespecting you or your opinions.

You obviously have not done the same to me.

Yes, you've been very disrespectful - since your first post directed towards me with your passive-aggressive stance "sometimes we get caught up in how well someone shoots vice what other areas he may contribute in" and mentioning his rebounding, implying I was only discussing his shooting when I actually had explicitly mentioned his rebounding. Then you followed up with making false assumptions about what I think and accusing me of being biased and whatnot. It's sad you don't understand that, but it is what it is. I certainly did nothing of that kind.

And I've reported your posts, so from now on I'll let the moderation deal with you. Conversation over.

Proveo - obviously this could go on and on with us, and I chose not to go there.

It's only been about the 4th time I've been disrespected  here on the blog in a year, and the Mods have failed to step in.

You have made your point, and I've made mine.

[GreenEnvy]

I remember reading someone pointing out all these missed opportunities for him to drive in for Alley oops and etc. But I think JGreen read that b/c this game I saw him moving alot without the ball. And 2 possessions(1 where Pierce had turned his back to the basket then kicked it back to Ray at the top of the key. Green was right under the basket WIDE open.

Either way, he is under performing for his talent level or I should say talent ability. Maybe he'll pick it up next round versus James Jones/Mike Miller

He abused (and I mean abused) Miller in the post in his one game with the C's against Miami. Miller fouled him twice in two consecutive post-up possessions and had to be taken off Green immediately.

I don't see Jones being any better, as he is even weaker than Miller. The only player that can defend Green in the post is Lebron or Bosh. Put Pierce/Green/KG at the 2-3-4, and they can't guard all of them. If they try Wade on Pierce, let Rondo attack whoever they have out there, be it Bibby or Chalmers (but I think Pierce can take Wade because of his size. His upfake will either draw contact or get an easy look over him).


And put Shaq in the middle? Sorry Z, Howard and Anthony, you will get eaten alive.