Jeff Green>Josh Smith

[Celtics4ever]

Depends if you value stats over efficiency really.   I think Green is more efficient as JSmooth is not very efficient.  Jeff plays more within his strengths where Josh tries to be something he is not.   Smith has more talent though and I daresay production.

[Roy H.]

Depends if you value stats over efficiency really.  

What about if you value superb defense and better rebounding and passing over a very modest (potential) increase in efficiency?

Their shooting efficiency as measured by eFG% is almost identical.

[2short]

Here is a link to his splits while with Boston last year:

http://www.82games.com/1011/10BOS12.HTM#bypos

The net net of it can be summed up as, in 48 minutes of play, he's +5.7 at SF, -2.3 at PF.   That's a pretty compelling difference.  The first is near all-star level.  The latter is bench player.

I'm not sure you can look at a stat like individual point differential, and describe it as "all-star level".  First, if you look at his raw performance, Green has a 13.8 PER at SF.  That's below league-average PER.  Second, the performance came in situations where the Celtics were actually outscored on average, and where the offensive efficiency was an anemic 85.0 points per 100 possessions.  Green was near last on the team in terms of +/-.

It's obviously good that Green generally outscored the guy he was guarding.  However, on balance, the team played poorly with him in the game, especially at SF.  Part of that may be due to his lack of other contributions, such as rebounding, passing, etc.

As I said to IP, try not to read too much into the 'near all-star' comment.  That was more a statement about the specific number, not necessarily about Jeff Green.  'Just trying to put into perspective the difference between +5.7 and -2.3.

A lot of our offensive woes down the stretch of last spring had mostly to do with how banged up Rondo was by then.   I don't want to dive into all the specifics of everything that was going on.  Your last comment seems a little back-handed.

I've been following Jeff Green's game for years so much of my assessment of him comes from the 'eyeball' perspective.  I have a pretty good idea of what he can and can't do on the court and I (and a lot of others who have watched him) have been consistent in this view that he has been very much a mis-cast and under-utilized player through almost his whole career.  That he is a natural SF and an undersized PF.

I have very high confidence that if given a chance to play primarily at SF, within a system like Boston plays, that he would excel.  I am not in the business of making silly predictions like all-star appearances.  Just that he would almost certainly play very well.

When he is in at sf I would like to see him on the block against just about every sf in the nba.  He has nice post passing and good little back to basket offensive game (hooks etc).  Green has the offensive skills to be a nice complimentary player, he has the step back jump shot that pierce has made a career out of and is fast filling lanes for 6'9" and whatever his weight.  I'd give him time at pf if we are going small ball.  That isn't the same as pp or mp at power forward that is legit size.  What I noticed when he arrived in boston was a guy playing within the team game and not forcing his own shots.  I think contract wise he is a better signing than Smith.  I don't feel either player will be all stars, best power forward on atlanta is al horford.  Both smith & green are good 3rd options on a good team.

[Mr October]

Part of the Jeff Green at the 4 problem was that he was often paired with Davis at the 5. Green + KG is better than Green + Davis.

I would love to see what a lineup of Rondo, Bradley, Pierce, Green , KG can do for long stretches.

[OmarSekou]

I hope Jeff gets healthy and becomes a player. I think that's what this thread is really about.

[paintitgreen]

I've been following Jeff Green's game for years so much of my assessment of him comes from the 'eyeball' perspective.  I have a pretty good idea of what he can and can't do on the court and I (and a lot of others who have watched him) have been consistent in this view that he has been very much a mis-cast and under-utilized player through almost his whole career.  That he is a natural SF and an undersized PF.

I have very high confidence that if given a chance to play primarily at SF, within a system like Boston plays, that he would excel.  I am not in the business of making silly predictions like all-star appearances.  Just that he would almost certainly play very well.

I agree with this to an extent. I think the evidence points to the conclusion that Green is not a power forward. Whether he's a starting small forward is still an open question. At this point, he seems to me to be a bench forward, spelling minutes at the 3 and playing some smallball 4 in specific matchups. I don't think he's better than Smith by any measure, but I do think that if you get him on the right contract (I'm thinking something in the neighborhood of $5.5 to $6.5 per year), he's better value than Smith.

[jambr380]

I know there are people on this blog that actually think that Green is currently better than Smith, but I think many of us making the argument for Green - including myself - also are heavily taking into account his [future] contract. Obviously Smith is a more proven commodity, but he is a max-level contract and we would have to decide whether or not he would be good enough to be one of our top two players going forward.

I feel like there is more leeway with Green. He won't demand a long term contract right away and, even with a successful season, won't demand the $$ that Smith will.

Frankly, I would love to see both players on the Celtics. Those two paired with Rondo and Avery would give us the most athletic team in the league.

I know this won't be a popular question - and I doubt that I would do it - but, would anybody trade Pierce for Smith straight up and then move [an assumed] healthy Green into the starting rotation???

[RajonRondo9Dime]

cant wait for green to come back. he's dedicated to this team

No he's not.

And no, he's not better than Josh Smith.

I think people forget just how mediocre he was for us last year.

[traderondo]

Agree wholeheartedly, Jeff Green is the better player. He may be less aggressive but at least he knows what he's good at & not good at... J (not so) Smoove has no idea what a bad shot is.

Jeff green is roughly as efficient than josh smith, even with smiths poor shot selection. Their career TS% is rather close.

Smith is the better player by a huge margin. Josh smith is a near all star level PF. Jeff Green is a backup SF or third string PF.

Green is more efficient.  .478 for Smith vs .483 for Green for eFG%.  His True Shooting percentage is .526 vs Smith .518. 

The argument is really unfair to make either way.  Green has been in an offense that demands touches go to to Durant and Westbrook.  His points are going to be lower than you'd expect for a 5th overall pick, but they are still efficient. 

I saw someone else's post that he is lazy because sometimes he goes off for big games but others he doesn't.  That is just nonsense.  If you listen to his interviews or watch his style of play you know that his isn't trying to "get his".  When he gets shots he likes, takes them.  He doesn't go for volume.  When you have other great players around you that is the best way to play (think of PP running ISO and 'Toine shooting 3s under O'Brien vs what we have today under Doc)

As for another commenter's post on "how little he actually did for us last year", take a look here at his career numbers (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/greenje02.html) under the advanced tab.  Statistically this was his most efficient year yet.  He didn't come here to score in numbers, he came to have another shooter on floor in crunch time, spell PP, and play solid basketball and by all accounts he fit that role very well.

In his time in the NBA he has never been asked to be the go to guy and put up numbers.  If asked to do that after the Big 3 leave, I think he more than has the potential to become a more aggressive player.  Good thing for Green and the Celtics is that Doc doesn't want anyone dominating the ball and lets the flow of the offense find open players.  I think he will really thrive as he gets minutes and his role becomes clear next year. 

My vote is to do a two-year deal with team option.  I think his stock is low for the wrong reasons (touches in both OKC & Boston and his health) and we would be wise to get a few years out of him if we can.

[ManUp]

Agree wholeheartedly, Jeff Green is the better player. He may be less aggressive but at least he knows what he's good at & not good at... J (not so) Smoove has no idea what a bad shot is.

Jeff green is roughly as efficient than josh smith, even with smiths poor shot selection. Their career TS% is rather close.

Smith is the better player by a huge margin. Josh smith is a near all star level PF. Jeff Green is a backup SF or third string PF.

Green is more efficient.  .478 for Smith vs .483 for Green for eFG%.  His True Shooting percentage is .526 vs Smith .518. 

The argument is really unfair to make either way.  Green has been in an offense that demands touches go to to Durant and Westbrook.  His points are going to be lower than you'd expect for a 5th overall pick, but they are still efficient. 

I saw someone else's post that he is lazy because sometimes he goes off for big games but others he doesn't.  That is just nonsense.  If you listen to his interviews or watch his style of play you know that his isn't trying to "get his".  When he gets shots he likes, takes them.  He doesn't go for volume.  When you have other great players around you that is the best way to play (think of PP running ISO and 'Toine shooting 3s under O'Brien vs what we have today under Doc)

As for another commenter's post on "how little he actually did for us last year", take a look here at his career numbers (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/greenje02.html) under the advanced tab.  Statistically this was his most efficient year yet.  He didn't come here to score in numbers, he came to have another shooter on floor in crunch time, spell PP, and play solid basketball and by all accounts he fit that role very well.

In his time in the NBA he has never been asked to be the go to guy and put up numbers.  If asked to do that after the Big 3 leave, I think he more than has the potential to become a more aggressive player.  Good thing for Green and the Celtics is that Doc doesn't want anyone dominating the ball and lets the flow of the offense find open players.  I think he will really thrive as he gets minutes and his role becomes clear next year. 

My vote is to do a two-year deal with team option.  I think his stock is low for the wrong reasons (touches in both OKC & Boston and his health) and we would be wise to get a few years out of him if we can.

Are we supposed to value the minor difference in shooting efficiency over production in other areas such as points, rebounds, assists, blocks, and steals? This is kind of like the Williams vs Rondo threads accept in reverse. In this thread Smith is Rondo and Green is Williams. The big difference is that Smith kills Green in every area, where as for Rondo/Williams some stuff is comparable and can go either way. The concept of objectivity is completely lost for some fans on this forum.

[indeedproceed]

Agree wholeheartedly, Jeff Green is the better player. He may be less aggressive but at least he knows what he's good at & not good at... J (not so) Smoove has no idea what a bad shot is.

Jeff green is roughly as efficient than josh smith, even with smiths poor shot selection. Their career TS% is rather close.

Smith is the better player by a huge margin. Josh smith is a near all star level PF. Jeff Green is a backup SF or third string PF.

Green is more efficient.  .478 for Smith vs .483 for Green for eFG%.  His True Shooting percentage is .526 vs Smith .518.

That's a 5% and 8% difference, and that's shooting only. Not identical, but negligible. On top of that, you have to factor in Smith's role, and larger volume of shots taken, and that just furthers the argument. 

The argument is really unfair to make either way.  Green has been in an offense that demands touches go to to Durant and Westbrook.  His points are going to be lower than you'd expect for a 5th overall pick, but they are still efficient. 

Actually, if a guy is the 3, sometimes 4th option on offense, you'd expect his shooting %'s to be higher. He picks and chooses his shots, as opposed to Smith, who is usually the 1st or 2nd option on offense, so he has to force more.

As for another commenter's post on "how little he actually did for us last year", take a look here at his career numbers (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/greenje02.html) under the advanced tab.  Statistically this was his most efficient year yet.  He didn't come here to score in numbers, he came to have another shooter on floor in crunch time, spell PP, and play solid basketball and by all accounts he fit that role very well.

'By all accounts he fit that role very well'? Did he? I think he did okay. He had allegedly his best year yet, and he managed a sub-average PER. Even in limited minutes, you're hoping for more than that.

In his time in the NBA he has never been asked to be the go to guy and put up numbers.  If asked to do that after the Big 3 leave, I think he more than has the potential to become a more aggressive player.  Good thing for Green and the Celtics is that Doc doesn't want anyone dominating the ball and lets the flow of the offense find open players.  I think he will really thrive as he gets minutes and his role becomes clear next year. 

My vote is to do a two-year deal with team option.  I think his stock is low for the wrong reasons (touches in both OKC & Boston and his health) and we would be wise to get a few years out of him if we can.

That might all be true, and it might not be. What we do know is true is that right now, at just 2 yrs older than Green, Josh Smith is an All-Star level player with playoff experience and elite-level help defense.

Josh Smith > Jeff Green.

[Goldstar88]

[/quote]

That might all be true, and it might not be. What we do know is true is that right now, at just 2 yrs older than Green, Josh Smith is an All-Star level player with playoff experience and elite-level help defense.

Josh Smith > Jeff Green.
[/quote]




If this is true, why was Atlanta shopping him so hard? Why were there reports that he wanted to be traded? Hes not a team guy. Hes concerned with getting his and wants to be the focal point of the offense.

[Eja117]

   I would take Jeff Green over Smith every day of the week and twice on Sundays.

It's like I don't even know you!

[Goldstar88]

   I would take Jeff Green over Smith every day of the week and twice on Sundays.

It's like I don't even know you!

Jeff Greens contract is going to be half of what smiths is. So over paid. If I was Horford I would be B.S. that hes being paid more. Its a joke.

[ballin]

They're both overrated as hell, but Smith is the better of the two.

But like someone else has said, Smith is going to get horribly overpaid. Green will probably just be less horribly overpaid.