Should we start Jeff Green at SF?

[TheRev72]

paul pierce at this point in his career cannot play the 2. he does not have quickness or lateral quickness to defend the 2's out there.

I think Pierce can defend the vast majority of two guards out there.

I'd expect him to struggle with the quicker more explosive variety but they (usually smaller guards) can't defend Pierce either on the other end ... and I trust Pierce to punish them more than they can punish him (Pierce has a lot of protection defensively with KG + Boston's team defense).

So I think that is a net gain for us and I'd expect most coaches to see it the same way and avoid that matchup for that very reason. Keep more size out there to defend Pierce which Pierce can defend better.

And if they switch that smaller wing onto Green, Jeff is a good enough post player to punish that player too.

Agree with OP on starting Green and Pierce. Since Bradley will likely still be recovering when the season begins, starting Pierce and Green on the wings certainly makes the most sense as Pierce is better than the names bandied about at the shooting guard that are available.

Does anyone really think Pierce would do a worse job than Ray? I'd argue he'd be better and his ability to post-up smaller guards on offense (like Kobe does) would more than offset any defensive disadvantage. Besides, with the defense the Celtics actually run, the ability to know where you are supposed to be and rotate to that spot is generally far more important than actual one-on-one defensive skills.

Starting Pierce at the "2" should accomplish the purpose of starting the 5 best players on the team: Rondo-Pierce-Green-Bass-KG. That's a lot of good shooters for Rondo to find. When Bradley comes back, he can either earn a starting spot over Green or claim his (probably rightful) role as a game-changing defensive stopper off the bench.

[Fafnir]

Given that Green/Pierce are our only two SFs on the roster at the moment starting them together doesn't make a ton of sense. Harder to keep one of them on the floor most of the time.

I also think Bradley's level of play was much higher than Green's at the end of last year, I'd like to see him right back in the starting line up when he's ready to see if he can keep that up.

[Jon]

paul pierce at this point in his career cannot play the 2. he does not have quickness or lateral quickness to defend the 2's out there.

I think Pierce can defend the vast majority of two guards out there.

I'd expect him to struggle with the quicker more explosive variety but they (usually smaller guards) can't defend Pierce either on the other end ... and I trust Pierce to punish them more than they can punish him (Pierce has a lot of protection defensively with KG + Boston's team defense).

So I think that is a net gain for us and I'd expect most coaches to see it the same way and avoid that matchup for that very reason. Keep more size out there to defend Pierce which Pierce can defend better.

And if they switch that smaller wing onto Green, Jeff is a good enough post player to punish that player too.

Agree with OP on starting Green and Pierce. Since Bradley will likely still be recovering when the season begins, starting Pierce and Green on the wings certainly makes the most sense as Pierce is better than the names bandied about at the shooting guard that are available.

Does anyone really think Pierce would do a worse job than Ray? I'd argue he'd be better and his ability to post-up smaller guards on offense (like Kobe does) would more than offset any defensive disadvantage. Besides, with the defense the Celtics actually run, the ability to know where you are supposed to be and rotate to that spot is generally far more important than actual one-on-one defensive skills.

Starting Pierce at the "2" should accomplish the purpose of starting the 5 best players on the team: Rondo-Pierce-Green-Bass-KG. That's a lot of good shooters for Rondo to find. When Bradley comes back, he can either earn a starting spot over Green or claim his (probably rightful) role as a game-changing defensive stopper off the bench.

I agree that position is overrated.  Ideally Pierce would play the 3 (particularly at his age), however, that doesn't mean that he isn't a better defensive 2 than someone like Moore or Terry (the other two current options).  And that of course doesn't account for the superior offensive production he would provide. 

I also think we can swing it with those two being the only two guards.  Terry is clearly the 6th man on this team.  So at the 6 minute mark or so when KG comes out, I'd give Pierce a blow too, bring in Terry.  Then around the 2 minute mark you can ring Pierce back in at the 3 in place of Green. 

This could all go out the door depending how they round out the roster.  If they get Lee, he will likely start.  Even if they don't and simply get Pietrus, then we have another guy who can play the 2/3, so the issue of Pierce and Green being the only 3s on the team also goes out the window. 

[TheRev72]

paul pierce at this point in his career cannot play the 2. he does not have quickness or lateral quickness to defend the 2's out there.

I think Pierce can defend the vast majority of two guards out there.

I'd expect him to struggle with the quicker more explosive variety but they (usually smaller guards) can't defend Pierce either on the other end ... and I trust Pierce to punish them more than they can punish him (Pierce has a lot of protection defensively with KG + Boston's team defense).

So I think that is a net gain for us and I'd expect most coaches to see it the same way and avoid that matchup for that very reason. Keep more size out there to defend Pierce which Pierce can defend better.

And if they switch that smaller wing onto Green, Jeff is a good enough post player to punish that player too.

Agree with OP on starting Green and Pierce. Since Bradley will likely still be recovering when the season begins, starting Pierce and Green on the wings certainly makes the most sense as Pierce is better than the names bandied about at the shooting guard that are available.

Does anyone really think Pierce would do a worse job than Ray? I'd argue he'd be better and his ability to post-up smaller guards on offense (like Kobe does) would more than offset any defensive disadvantage. Besides, with the defense the Celtics actually run, the ability to know where you are supposed to be and rotate to that spot is generally far more important than actual one-on-one defensive skills.

Starting Pierce at the "2" should accomplish the purpose of starting the 5 best players on the team: Rondo-Pierce-Green-Bass-KG. That's a lot of good shooters for Rondo to find. When Bradley comes back, he can either earn a starting spot over Green or claim his (probably rightful) role as a game-changing defensive stopper off the bench.

I agree that position is overrated.  Ideally Pierce would play the 3 (particularly at his age), however, that doesn't mean that he isn't a better defensive 2 than someone like Moore or Terry (the other two current options).  And that of course doesn't account for the superior offensive production he would provide. 

I also think we can swing it with those two being the only two guards.  Terry is clearly the 6th man on this team.  So at the 6 minute mark or so when KG comes out, I'd give Pierce a blow too, bring in Terry.  Then around the 2 minute mark you can ring Pierce back in at the 3 in place of Green. 

This could all go out the door depending how they round out the roster.  If they get Lee, he will likely start.  Even if they don't and simply get Pietrus, then we have another guy who can play the 2/3, so the issue of Pierce and Green being the only 3s on the team also goes out the window. 

Yes. The difference between the SG and SF is pretty non-existent for Doc, he tends to just refer to them as "wings." If you are starting Pierce and Green, you can get a few backup minutes on the wing from some combination of Terry/Pietrus/Moore/Joseph and, of course, Bradley (when he comes back). Just have one of Pierce or Green on the floor at any given time to match up with any size at the other team's SF spot.

[Snakehead]

I'd prefer not to start Pierce at SG if we have another option but if the roster shakes out without us adding Lee or Pietrus or someone else unexpected then I don't think it'd be too bad.

I like Terry in his bench role.

[Bankshot]

paul pierce at this point in his career cannot play the 2. he does not have quickness or lateral quickness to defend the 2's out there.

[Jon]

paul pierce at this point in his career cannot play the 2. he does not have quickness or lateral quickness to defend the 2's out there.

I agree it's not ideal.  However, I'd argue even with his diminished lateral quickness, he's still a better defender than Terry or Moore (our two other current options to start there). 

He can stay a step off of most 2s given his length and still be a threat to block the shot. 

And he certainly would be a nightmare on the offensive end.  Most 3s can't handle Pierce in the post.  No 2 would have a chance. 

Again, it's not ideal; however, people are acting like we have Courtney Lee right now.  If it came down to starting Terry (who has his own share of problems playing the 2) or Moore (who arguably doesn't belong in the NBA), Pierce is clearly the better option.

When Bradley comes back or if we get Lee, I think the discussion changes. 

[clover]

Given that Green/Pierce are our only two SFs on the roster at the moment starting them together doesn't make a ton of sense. Harder to keep one of them on the floor most of the time.

I also think Bradley's level of play was much higher than Green's at the end of last year, I'd like to see him right back in the starting line up when he's ready to see if he can keep that up.

I agree re: Green and Pierce.  Technically, however, I believe Joseph is on the roster unless and until they cut him.