First off let me give their propers where they are due. This thread is in response to Jeff's very good front page article about Jeff Green and the dilemma he brings to the Celtics.
http://www.celticsblog.com/2011/8/25/2383453/jeff-green-utility-infielderGreen is the classic Jack of All Trades, Master of None. Or put another way, he's a utility infielder right now. He can fill in at multiple positions but he's not good enough at any of them to oust the starter or even create a platoon situation.
I suppose, as Flannery suggests, that it is too early to write him off. I'm sure less talented players have developed a niche later in their careers than Green. In the right situation he should be able to focus on a few things and establish himself as a solid rotation guy for many years.
There are, however, two big issues getting in his way of doing that in Boston.
First he is a free agent, and if he's going to stay here, he and the team are going to have to agree on his value. Ideally there would be a one year deal that let him prove his worth (be it the qualifying offer or even a higher one year deal to keep him from jumping to another team for more years). But the owners and executives of NBA teams have proven that they are hardly the most rationale of sorts when it comes to spending their own money and all it takes is one GM to be convinced that Green is worth multiple years at 8 to 10M per money.
Second, there is the issue of expectations. Through little fault of his own, Green has a huge target on his back with fans and the media. Instead of being allowed to prove himself on his own merit, he has to live up to several legacies. He has to be as valuable as Perkins to justify the trade. Doc talked about him playing a James Posey type of role. He replaced both Tony Allen and Marquis Daniels at the backup wing position and doesn't play defense as well as either of them. If we had signed him as a free agent, he might have been allowed to carve out his own piece of legacy, but that didn't happen and he has to play with the cards he's been dealt.
Will he sink or will he swim? Will he stay or will he go? There are many questions with Jeff Green and we don't have a lot of answers right now, but that won't stop us all from talking about it.
Sink or swim seems to be the perfect analogy. Do the Celtics sign Green, give him his minutes in their system while taking them from KG, Pierce and Ray and live with the results? If he swims, great, if he sinks, well then so does the C's chances at one last title shot? Is everyone okay with that?
Because after the lockout if you want to retain Jeff green, my guess is it will take a multi-year deal in the range of more than $20 million, minimum. I am sure that we armchair GMs are all saying we would prefer a one year show-me contract but let's face reality, that isn't going to be what Green or his agent will be looking for.
So if that is what it takes to get Jeff Green, you have to ask yourself this question. Given the two ends of the mistake spectrum that can be made, which mistake can the Celtics better live with and probably overcome, signing Jeff Green to a multi-year, multi-millions per year contract and he becomes a bust or letting him go elsewhere, retaining cap flexibility and watching him become everything this club needs? Which of these mistakes are most likely to happen and which are the Celtics best prepared to overcome while rebuilding after the Big Three Era ends?
Personally, I say offer him the qualifying offer to retain the rights to a sign and trade, if those are still allowed in the new CBA. If he takes the one year deal, great. If he signs elsewhere at 3-4 years at $20-30 million well, it was nice knowing you Jeff. See ya.
I just think it foolish of Ainge to invest a large contract on this player given how little he has shown, how his game seems to have peaked two years ago and with the need to have as much cap space available for the 2012 off season.
Topic: Jeff Green: The sink or swim signing (Read 13495 times)