Start Green over KG or Pierce (merged thread)

[wdleehi]

I really have to wonder why some people are so quick to dismiss not starting your 5 best players?  What is even more outlandish, is how merely suggesting bringing one of your starters off the bench is something to be mocked.  Do people not realize how important the 6th man role is.  There are plenty of players who have come of the bench and helped lead their team to success.

That being said,  KG does not fit the mold.  I'm begining to come around about the idea of Pierce coming off the bench, but still would be against that as well.  Ray seems to be the most likely candidate, but his shooting is too important to the starting unit.
Either way, the idea should not be so hastliy cast aside.  With this roster, creative ideas are going to be needed.

If the Celtics had a player that showed to be productive enough, but Pierce is still the go to guy. 

Green has not shown enough to warrant starting over Pierce or KG. 

Do you think that Green has been given enough of a chance to show his productivity? I don't think it's out of the question that he could average the same amount of points as Pierce if he was given the chance. It wouldn't be like the Thunder where he was the 3rd string scorer behind Durant and Westbrook.
I think it's very possible that he could average an efficient 18-20 ppg whilst running the floor much better than Pierce.

Pierce could provide that spark off the bench just like Manu Ginobli with his efficiency too.

I think that Pierce is the better player, but the current format of playing time isn't going to work as we saw this year on these old guys body's.
Why not try it out for a while?

Yes.


His play in Boston has not been good enough.


His past history with the Thunder is not good enough to replace Pierce.



I like Green, but he is not good enough to start over Pierce and/or KG. 

[Eddie20]

I think that the reason they are strongly considering starting Green for Pierce is because Ainge was pointing out how productive Green was when playing alongside the starters. He said, that on a per possession basis, Green was the best offensive player on the team during the playoffs. The likely thinking is that Pierce will be equally productive a starter or off the bench with his ability to create shots for himself. However, Green would struggle and play much better with the starters.

[chambers]

I really have to wonder why some people are so quick to dismiss not starting your 5 best players?  What is even more outlandish, is how merely suggesting bringing one of your starters off the bench is something to be mocked.  Do people not realize how important the 6th man role is.  There are plenty of players who have come of the bench and helped lead their team to success.

That being said,  KG does not fit the mold.  I'm begining to come around about the idea of Pierce coming off the bench, but still would be against that as well.  Ray seems to be the most likely candidate, but his shooting is too important to the starting unit.
Either way, the idea should not be so hastliy cast aside.  With this roster, creative ideas are going to be needed.

If the Celtics had a player that showed to be productive enough, but Pierce is still the go to guy. 

Green has not shown enough to warrant starting over Pierce or KG. 

Do you think that Green has been given enough of a chance to show his productivity? I don't think it's out of the question that he could average the same amount of points as Pierce if he was given the chance. It wouldn't be like the Thunder where he was the 3rd string scorer behind Durant and Westbrook.
I think it's very possible that he could average an efficient 18-20 ppg whilst running the floor much better than Pierce.

Pierce could provide that spark off the bench just like Manu Ginobli with his efficiency too.

I think that Pierce is the better player, but the current format of playing time isn't going to work as we saw this year on these old guys body's.
Why not try it out for a while?

Yes.


His play in Boston has not been good enough.


His past history with the Thunder is not good enough to replace Pierce.



I like Green, but he is not good enough to start over Pierce and/or KG. 

I don't think you answered my question.
If Green was given Paul Pierce's minutes and inserted with the other four starters, could he average 18 ppg or better?

He averaged 15.2 ppg with OKC in 2010, that was as the third option behind Durant and Westbrook (one of whom is the leagues leading scorer obviously).

He would become one of our top 2 scoring options.

You're saying his play has not been good enough, but do you think he has been given enough time (ie half a season coming off the bench on a new team), and enough time (minutes wise per game) to make this evaluation?

The correct answer is definitely not.

I'm not saying he is definitely better than Pierce, but he hasn't had a real shot at proving himself. His best play this year was when he ran out there with the starters.

Idea: Give him a run at a starting 3 spot (or even bench Ray and have PP + JG out there, bringing in Ray for PP and moving JG to the solid 3 spot after 6-7 mins).
See how he goes. What have we got to lose?
His defense has improved and will only get better, and he averaged 15.2 PPG as a starter and third scoring option.

You're talking about getting an explosive center or scoring option but realistically we aren't getting our hands on anyone good this offseason, so we have to do the best with what we've got and wait and pray for Dwight.

[GreenFaith1819]

In answer to the thread, No.

Keep KG as the starter. Bring back Glen Davis (hopefully), or if he moves on I'm not disposed to the idea of bringing back "The Show" (Leon Powe).

Whoever ends up as the backup PF, whether Glen, Powe, or whoever Danny brings in, just limit KG's minutes - even moreso than last year.

KG was tired in that MIA series, understandably, because Glen Davis was just not himself for whatever reason.

Hopefully, the Glen Davis some of know and love will return to us next season, healthier and ready to re-asume his role as one of the best 6th men in the game - and with the right mindset.

But - keep KG as the starter.

[wdleehi]

I really have to wonder why some people are so quick to dismiss not starting your 5 best players?  What is even more outlandish, is how merely suggesting bringing one of your starters off the bench is something to be mocked.  Do people not realize how important the 6th man role is.  There are plenty of players who have come of the bench and helped lead their team to success.

That being said,  KG does not fit the mold.  I'm begining to come around about the idea of Pierce coming off the bench, but still would be against that as well.  Ray seems to be the most likely candidate, but his shooting is too important to the starting unit.
Either way, the idea should not be so hastliy cast aside.  With this roster, creative ideas are going to be needed.

If the Celtics had a player that showed to be productive enough, but Pierce is still the go to guy. 

Green has not shown enough to warrant starting over Pierce or KG. 

Do you think that Green has been given enough of a chance to show his productivity? I don't think it's out of the question that he could average the same amount of points as Pierce if he was given the chance. It wouldn't be like the Thunder where he was the 3rd string scorer behind Durant and Westbrook.
I think it's very possible that he could average an efficient 18-20 ppg whilst running the floor much better than Pierce.

Pierce could provide that spark off the bench just like Manu Ginobli with his efficiency too.

I think that Pierce is the better player, but the current format of playing time isn't going to work as we saw this year on these old guys body's.
Why not try it out for a while?

Yes.


His play in Boston has not been good enough.


His past history with the Thunder is not good enough to replace Pierce.



I like Green, but he is not good enough to start over Pierce and/or KG. 

I don't think you answered my question.
If Green was given Paul Pierce's minutes and inserted with the other four starters, could he average 18 ppg or better?

He averaged 15.2 ppg with OKC in 2010, that was as the third option behind Durant and Westbrook (one of whom is the leagues leading scorer obviously).

He would become one of our top 2 scoring options.

You're saying his play has not been good enough, but do you think he has been given enough time (ie half a season coming off the bench on a new team), and enough time (minutes wise per game) to make this evaluation?

The correct answer is definitely not.

I'm not saying he is definitely better than Pierce, but he hasn't had a real shot at proving himself. His best play this year was when he ran out there with the starters.

Idea: Give him a run at a starting 3 spot (or even bench Ray and have PP + JG out there, bringing in Ray for PP and moving JG to the solid 3 spot after 6-7 mins).
See how he goes. What have we got to lose?
His defense has improved and will only get better, and he averaged 15.2 PPG as a starter and third scoring option.

You're talking about getting an explosive center or scoring option but realistically we aren't getting our hands on anyone good this offseason, so we have to do the best with what we've got and wait and pray for Dwight.

Not good enough.


He doesn't create offense like Pierce.  (needed among the starters)

He doesn't spread the floor like Ray.  (needed among the starters)

He doesn't defend or rebound (or lead) like KG.  (needed among the starters)



If there was a big time offensive threat at the 1 or 5, then maybe you could start Green over Pierce, but their isn't.



There is no healthy reason to start Green over KG.

[nyceltsfan]

This is not about Green being better than KG or Pierce.  It is about getting the most out of your roster.

Personally, I do not like benching KG, our best interior defender, for Green.  I actually like Pierce better for the 6th man.

Please remember that Posey was our 6th man in 2008.  He was a lock-down defender and can play multiple positions.  Pierce is just as versatile, if not moreso.  Also, just because Pierce is the "go-to" guy does not mean that he should start.  There is no law stating that your starting 5 has to be your finishing 5.

I dont think anyone is going to move Pierce to the bench, since Pierce is our captain and the face of the franchise, but think about Pierce being able to spell Green, Allen, Rondo, KG or our Center (if we play small ball).  He is the only player that can do that on this team and he can create mismatches no matter what position he comes in to play.

Likely?  No
Intriguing?  Yes

[mostofusrsad]

What is this desire to put the best players on the bench to start a guy that is weak defensively at that position and is not as good offensively?



So far we have seen benching both Pierce and KG to start Green.


Has Green shown anything that suggest he should start over these two players?

i agree with this perspective...green is not very good...it would be fine if we had the luxury of bringing kg off the bench...but that requires a top line starter and we are not even close with Green...

[LooseCannon]

Moving someone like Pierce or KG to the bench makes some sense to me because it makes it harder for Doc to overplay them with too many minutes.  I would still expect both to be part of the crunch time line-up, but Pierce coming off the bench is probably the way to make it most likely that he is playing something more like 30-33 mpg, if that's what you think he needs.  The same goes for if you think KG should be playing something like 25mpg.

Doc Rivers gets criticized here a lot for his rotations.  Moving PP or KG to the bench is one way to force him into certain patterns of usage.

[wdleehi]

This is not about Green being better than KG or Pierce.  It is about getting the most out of your roster.

Personally, I do not like benching KG, our best interior defender, for Green.  I actually like Pierce better for the 6th man.

Please remember that Posey was our 6th man in 2008.  He was a lock-down defender and can play multiple positions.  Pierce is just as versatile, if not moreso.  Also, just because Pierce is the "go-to" guy does not mean that he should start.  There is no law stating that your starting 5 has to be your finishing 5.

I dont think anyone is going to move Pierce to the bench, since Pierce is our captain and the face of the franchise, but think about Pierce being able to spell Green, Allen, Rondo, KG or our Center (if we play small ball).  He is the only player that can do that on this team and he can create mismatches no matter what position he comes in to play.

Likely?  No
Intriguing?  Yes

But why take Pierce out of the starting 5?  


Has the starters been the problem?  


Do they need a kick start?  



No.  The 4 starters are the strength of the team.  The more time they play together, the better the outcome is.


The bench needs to be rebuilt.  There is no one on there that is great.  No one on there that should become a starter on this team.  


But why break apart the part of the team that actually works well?  

[nyceltsfan]

Has the starters been the problem?  


Do they need a kick start?  




[/quote]

Correct - the bench is the problem.  I think Pierce off the bench would minimize the problem.

[wdleehi]

Has the starters been the problem?  


Do they need a kick start?  

Correct - the bench is the problem.  I think Pierce off the bench would minimize the problem.

Does it?  Or does it create another hole is the starting lineup. 

If Green and the rest of the bench is ineffective, replace them through trades. 


If the starting 4 are effective, keep them in place and replace the dead weight.

[chambers]

Has the starters been the problem?  


Do they need a kick start?  

Correct - the bench is the problem.  I think Pierce off the bench would minimize the problem.

Does it?  Or does it create another hole is the starting lineup. 

If Green and the rest of the bench is ineffective, replace them through trades. 


If the starting 4 are effective, keep them in place and replace the dead weight.

I would argue that against the Miami Heat, the starters were not effective and that having a faster team with an uptempo style of play that took advantage of Rondo's speed, would have yielded interesting and quite positive results.

Here's a question for you:
If Jeff Green was scoring 15.2 ppg as the 3rd option scorer, would it be worth trying him in the starting line up with Rondo, to utilize his athleticism?(much like the OKC Thunder did with him on that young, quick team).
If Green can be better as a starter(avg 20 ppg +7 rebounds +5 assists etc) and Pierce can provide 15 ppg off the bench then we are probably in a better position because we are preserving his minutes for the playoffs to finish games PLUS possibly getting more efficient scoring out of two of our best scorers.

Think of Pierce as the Manu Ginobli of the Celtics, coming in a wreaking havoc on backup 3 and 2 guards, while Jeff Green runs the floor with Rondo , tiring guys like Wade and Lebron out for the 4th quarter when Pierce steps up and does his clutch thing.

[nyceltsfan]

Correct - the bench is the problem.  I think Pierce off the bench would minimize the problem.
[/quote]


Does it?  Or does it create another hole is the starting lineup. 

If Green and the rest of the bench is ineffective, replace them through trades. 


If the starting 4 are effective, keep them in place and replace the dead weight.
[/quote]

Have we not tried to go that route every year since 2008?  Has it netted us any championships?  The problem is that the starting unit is very efficient and anything off the bench is like a relief to the opposing team.

As a team, we need a player that can be instant offense off the bench, meaning someone that can create his own shot.  Pierce is that guy.  Green can be set up for shots in the starting group, but does not flourish as much off the bench.

I don't know the answer to this yet, but how much less efficient does the starting unit get by replacing Pierce with Green?  How much more efficient does the bench get by replacing Green with Pierce? 

This is a more important issue than not breaking the starting unit because they are efficient and work well together.

[mgent]

Danny is a freakin idiot for putting this idea in peoples' heads.  Bench Pierce?  Really Danny?  That's even worse than benching KG.

Absolutely none of our guys are better suited to come off the bench ala JR Smith, Crawford, Terry, OJ Mayo, or even Manu.

On top of this none of our current bench players are even close to being passable as a starter (well West is close but not close to Rondo or Ray).

If you guys really want to screw around with the starters that bad then just keep swapping the O'Neals.

[wdleehi]

2009, no KG


2010, game 7 of the finals where the lack of size (injury) killed them.  


2011.  Rondo hurt.  Only healthy C has a broken hand.  Bench, no show.  


So, in the 4 years, 1 title.  2 final appearances.  2 disappointing 2nd round exit with major injuries.  



Yep, those four starters are the problem.