Is Jeff Green's contract starting to look like a bargain?

[CelticConcourse]

Playing out of position and off the bench...

You can go back and forth forever on this guy. I see both sides of it.

Which has kind of been my point the whole time. If you are truly honest with yourself and look at the whole Jeff Green package, you should be able to see both the good and the bad. You should be able to see all the reasons for failure but also see the excuses. You should see all the reasons to be hopeful but also see why he could be a false hope.

Personally, given the circumstances I would have handled the Jeff Green contract very differently. I would offered him the same one year/$9 million contract that he signed before having heart issues. If he did well, I would have given him the multi-year deal after he showed me he could perform at that level. That's basically what the C's were doing before.

Why change because of the heart issue? Actually the question should be, why once the heart issue arose did the Celtics go from a conservative attitude of short years and prove you are worth the money to a more liberal and chancy 4 year/$36 million deal?

If Green hedged because he wanted security of more years now that he had the heart issue, I would have offered him about what the Celtics offered Bass, 4 years/$24 million or so.

Maybe it has something to do with Green being closer to his prime. The problem is, we don't exactly know what other teams would have offered Green in that situation.

Would he have gotten an offer of $6mil/yr for four years from another team? $7mil/yr? $8mil/yr? We really don't know, but $9mil/yr probably was overpaying.

I don't see much wrong with overpaying to keep one player for his prime. I think it was a calculated risk, one that many teams make for many players. The difference is, Jeff was more unknown than most players, coming back from heart surgery and an underwhelming 2010-11 stint.

Again, I ask, why change once he got the heart condition?

Remember, before the heart condition, when he was a restricted free agent, the Celtics offered Green a one year-$9 million contract and he accepted. The Celtics knew that if he had an awesome year, he would be an unrestricted free agent the next year and possibly gone. He then had the heart issue.

If anything the heart issue should have raised more red flags and caused the Celtics to go even more conservative with the way the dealt with him. Instead, they went the other way. They gave him even more years than when they thought he was 100% healthy.

Was it because Danny wanted the salary slot and could care less what he got out of Green as he planned on eventually moving the contract? Was it because he is convinced that Green will be 100% healthy going forward and thought he might be getting a huge bargain? Did the lack of other options due to the new CBA force this? Was it all of this or none of this?

I am stunned that people believe that given Green's history and his history with the Celtics and his heart condition, that they believe this a good and fair market value contract. It could turn out to be one. It could turn out to be a bargain and yes, it is looking like it might be if Green can give the team for 4 years what he has given them the last 2 months. Still though, given the business position Danny had Green in, he signed him to a bad deal. He should have been able to have gotten him signed for much less.

Agreed. If anything, Jeff Green should have gotten a way lesser contract. A heart condition is nothing to wave off, and it should clearly have lowered his true value, at least to most GMs. However, we still offered him $9mil/yr for even LONGER this time, four years instead of one. Obviously, Danny did this for a reason, and just because we don't know what exactly the reason was, doesn't mean there is no reason. Danny isn't a dumb GM (no GM is dumb) and I'm guaranteed sure there's a reason he signed Jeff for four years at relatively big bucks. So, what could the reason be?

-He wanted to get the deal over with; this was his last chance at keeping Jeff
-He wanted to make up for the Perkins deal (lots of people here think this is a possibility)
-He knew Jeff would come back healthy, somehow, behind the scenes
-He saw Jeff was approaching his prime
-He saw undeniable talent after watching Jeff Green mixtapes during the 2011-12 season, and realized the gamble was worth it
-He just really loves Green

No GM makes a decision for no reason, so Danny must have had a reason. What it is for sure, we don't know.

[BballTim]

I know Jeff Green fans love to gush all over his big point nights and start asking questions like "Is Jeff Green's contract starting to look like a bargain?" or "Is Jeff Green a top 5 SF" or "What other players have the skill set of Jeff Green?" after he's gone off.

Well last night should have been the big night for you. Jeff Green got to be an all-by-himself, number 1 option, playing against a bad team as a Celtic with the opportunity to show the world he has arrived and lead his team to victory with a big night.

Instead he struggled.

Jeff is a great role playing player. He is best trying to do what he does best and not much more. He can hit the long range jumper and this year he's doing it better than most year's. He can go to the hole and get his as long as its against a mismatch. If he has an above average defending small forward guarding him, he's can't do that nearly as well. He plays good perimeter defense on larger players but will never be confused with a great defender. His rebounding is loathsome as his rebounding percentage and per game numbers are embarrassing for a superior athlete of his size and strength.

And most importantly, he has done this before. He's had great 2 month stretches in the past and then gone on to fall back. he is as consistently inconsistent as any better than average player in the league.

I don't see that being worth $36 million over 4 years. Not by a long shot.

Yeah, I agree with what you're saying. But I'm curious as to what you think "being worth $36 million over 4 years" truly constitutes. In my opinion, market value is how much the market pays, and if a a certain type of player deserves just $5mil/year, but can get offers of $8mil/year from ten teams, then he's an $8mil/year player.

Do you think no other team would want Jeff (playing at his current capacity) for four years @ $9mil/year? I don't know, but that's kind of hard to believe (for me, at least. I respect your opinion)

Who, aside from Boston obviously, was going to give Jeff Green, 4 yrs, 36 million last year?

I just don't see why it has to be, who was going to give him the money last year. It's four years for a reason: Ainge believes that Jeff Green will be performing solidly at an average of $9 million, for four years. We're two-thirds of the way into the first year, and there's just no way we can decide if it's a bust or a steal.

At his current playing rate, I'm sure at least 8 teams would pay him $9 mil, guaranteed. And like I said earlier: I'm curious as to what you think "being worth $36 million over 4 years" truly constitutes. In my opinion, market value is how much the market pays, and if a a certain type of player deserves just $5mil/year, but can get offers of $8mil/year from ten teams, then he's an $8mil/year player.

I think his market value is somewhere around $9mil/year, especially if the team signing him gets him locked up for his prime.

my comment was directly to your point on market value.  If no team, aside from Boston, was going to give Jeff Green 4 yrs, 36 million, then Boston did not pay market value.

Agreed. We did not pay market value, we paid higher than market value, for whatever reason. If he turns out to actually be a $9mil/yr player, then great, we got him at his true value. If he plays to be a $7mil/yr player, we screwed up.

What do you think his market value was, and what true value will he play at for the next four (now, three and a third) years?

Given where he was I don't think he would have gotten anything more than the MLE from another team (so basically Lee or Terry's contract).  I've gone on the record many times I wouldn't have given him more than 1 year and would have gone up to 9 million in that 1 year if necessary.  Of course that is mostly because I wouldn't pay my 3rd or 4th option that much money when I don't have a 2nd or 3rd option on the roster (after KG and PP retire or move on, there is just Rondo and a bunch of role players).

  People get caught up in these silly options. Short sample size, but for the last month+ Green's only been scoring a few points a game less than Pierce, yet PP is a #1 option while Green is somehow a 3rd or 4th option.

[CelticConcourse]

I don't know if it's just me, but it almost seems blatantly obvious, that Danny Ainge expects Jeff Green to be one of the future faces of the franchise... $9mil/yr is about what a second/third-best player on a team should earn (?)

[sofutomygaha]

f you restrict yourself to players who can play competently at either forward position, you have a very different conversation.

Like, when Alex Cora played for the Red Sox, he was one of the best players in the major leagues that could play second, third, and short. That didn't make him even a starting caliber player at any of those positions alone, though.

I don't think Green is a top 15 SF or a top 15 PF. He might crack the top 15 for combo forwards.

Then again, he might not. Here's a list of guys who play at least a little bit at both positions who are better-

Lebron James
Carmelo Anthony
Josh Smith
Dirk Nowitzki
Thad Young
Andrei Kirilenko
Shawn Marion
Danny Granger
David West
Paul Millsap
Ersan Ilyasova
Amir Johnson
Gallinari
Batum
Chandler Parsons

... that's 15 there.

[nickagneta]

I don't know if it's just me, but it almost seems blatantly obvious, that Danny Ainge expects Jeff Green to be one of the future faces of the franchise... $9mil/yr is about what a second/third-best player on a team should earn (?)

This makes the most sense. He probably figured it would take a year of coaching and playing to get Green to be aggressive enough to eventually be a 2nd or third option.

[CelticConcourse]

Lebron James
Carmelo Anthony
Josh Smith
Dirk Nowitzki
Thad Young
Andrei Kirilenko
Shawn Marion
Danny Granger
David West
Paul Millsap
Ersan Ilyasova
Amir Johnson
Gallinari
Batum
Chandler Parsons

This is probably the millionth time I'm doing this, but I guess I'll do it again.

Lebron James - of course, he'll be better
Carmelo Anthony - will most likely be way better
Josh Smith - it's possible, but I'll take the current $9mil/yr Green over the max JSmoove every day of the week
Dirk Nowitzki - never plays SF, ever
Thad Young - basically only a true PF now, he's taken just 12 treys these past two years, I can't compare Green with a full-time PF
Andrei Kirilenko - he may have won the duel yesterday, but I don't see him beating Green up for the next three years
Shawn Marion - getting old, great on D but won't be better than Green at age 36
Danny Granger - same goes for him; he's a good scorer who's getting old and not-so-good on D
David West - can't count full time PFs when comparing to Jeff
Paul Millsap - curious comparison, but I'll take a prime Jeff; you can make a case for Millsap though
Ersan Ilyasova - he should be compared to Jeff a lot more, after also underperforming with that hefty contract; best-case scenario, they have similar upsides, worst case: they're both wastes
Amir Johnson - another PF...
Gallinari - signed for more than Jeff, but a pretty good SF himself, he's a volume shooter and can be better than Jeff
Batum - one of the guys who's kind-of like Jeff, I think he has high upside as well and I'd take either Jeff or Batum
Chandler Parsons - too young to determine, but he has huge upside

Basically, I can't really compare with the full-time PFs while a lot of SFs can be bunched together (Batum, Gallo, Gay, George, Parsons, Leonard, ---) but I can't piece together a list of 15 SFs better than Jeff. Some (Durant/Melo/LBJ) are guaranteed better, but those three are the only clear-cut. Also, you have to look at the money problem (Gay, Josh Smith) which is the point of this thread anyways.

He shouldn't even be in the conversation for top 15 PF, he's not close.

[sofutomygaha]

This is probably the millionth time I'm doing this, but I guess I'll do it again.

Just a quick comment, there- I'm not an expert on when you can count a start/rotation as a 3 and when you can count it as a 4. All of the guys I listed above have qualified both as small forwards and power forwards in my fantasy basketball league in the last few years. Before you snag me for citing fantasy basketball in a serious conversation, my only point is that better informed basketball watchers than I prescribe the position eligibilities based on what happens in real games.

[CelticConcourse]

This is probably the millionth time I'm doing this, but I guess I'll do it again.

Just a quick comment, there- I'm not an expert on when you can count a start/rotation as a 3 and when you can count it as a 4. All of the guys I listed above have qualified both as small forwards and power forwards in my fantasy basketball league in the last few years. Before you snag me for citing fantasy basketball in a serious conversation, my only point is that better informed basketball watchers than I prescribe the position eligibilities based on what happens in real games.

Oh, no problem! It's just that I don't think it's really fair to compare Jeff to traditional power forwards, like KG or Duncan or Dirk or Derrick Favors or Thaddeus Young or LaMarcus Aldridge or Zach Randolph or Tristan Thompson or any of those guys who tough it up down under the rim.

Jeff seems to be more of a wing player, like Pierce or Melo/LBJ/KD; he doesn't hang around under the rim for rebounds or post up much. I don't think he's really that type of player!

[Kane3387]

I don't know if it's just me, but it almost seems blatantly obvious, that Danny Ainge expects Jeff Green to be one of the future faces of the franchise... $9mil/yr is about what a second/third-best player on a team should earn (?)

This makes the most sense. He probably figured it would take a year of coaching and playing to get Green to be aggressive enough to eventually be a 2nd or third option.

Agree with this line of thinking.

[jambr380]

I guess one of the biggest points people are leaving out is that Green's agent said that Green actually took less to play with the Celtics. Obviously this is most likely not totally true, but I don't doubt that there was a suitor out there that was willing to pay considerably more than the MLE. If Danny could have signed him for 7 a year, I don't see any reason why he did not...but none of us will ever really know.

[CelticConcourse]

I guess one of the biggest points people are leaving out is that Green's agent said that Green actually took less to play with the Celtics. Obviously this is most likely not totally true, but I don't doubt that there was a suitor out there that was willing to pay considerably more than the MLE. If Danny could have signed him for 7 a year, I don't see any reason why he did not...but none of us will ever really know.

I kind-of believe his agent... it seems very possible, to be honest.

[CelticD]

i wouldnt say he's a bargain, but i think he's finally livin up to his contract. green has been playin well enough for me to say that his game against the wolves was just an off one. only 10 shots and 5 turnovers, but idk if green is all that effective if he's the first scoring option.

im glad that green is makin a more concerted effort to pass the ball and play the point forward role but he has to work on the turnovers just like pierce.


on a side note, can someone tell me how to reply to someone's individual post? i dont think im doin this right.

[jambr380]

i wouldnt say he's a bargain, but i think he's finally livin up to his contract. green has been playin well enough for me to say that his game against the wolves was just an off one. only 10 shots and 5 turnovers, but idk if green is all that effective if he's the first scoring option.

im glad that green is makin a more concerted effort to pass the ball and play the point forward role but he has to work on the turnovers just like pierce.


on a side note, can someone tell me how to reply to someone's individual post? i dont think im doin this right.

On the post you want to reply to, you just click the, 'quote' tab on the top right of the post. It will then set up your post with it ready to post underneath the quote. Hope this helps! 

[Moranis]

I know Jeff Green fans love to gush all over his big point nights and start asking questions like "Is Jeff Green's contract starting to look like a bargain?" or "Is Jeff Green a top 5 SF" or "What other players have the skill set of Jeff Green?" after he's gone off.

Well last night should have been the big night for you. Jeff Green got to be an all-by-himself, number 1 option, playing against a bad team as a Celtic with the opportunity to show the world he has arrived and lead his team to victory with a big night.

Instead he struggled.

Jeff is a great role playing player. He is best trying to do what he does best and not much more. He can hit the long range jumper and this year he's doing it better than most year's. He can go to the hole and get his as long as its against a mismatch. If he has an above average defending small forward guarding him, he's can't do that nearly as well. He plays good perimeter defense on larger players but will never be confused with a great defender. His rebounding is loathsome as his rebounding percentage and per game numbers are embarrassing for a superior athlete of his size and strength.

And most importantly, he has done this before. He's had great 2 month stretches in the past and then gone on to fall back. he is as consistently inconsistent as any better than average player in the league.

I don't see that being worth $36 million over 4 years. Not by a long shot.

Yeah, I agree with what you're saying. But I'm curious as to what you think "being worth $36 million over 4 years" truly constitutes. In my opinion, market value is how much the market pays, and if a a certain type of player deserves just $5mil/year, but can get offers of $8mil/year from ten teams, then he's an $8mil/year player.

Do you think no other team would want Jeff (playing at his current capacity) for four years @ $9mil/year? I don't know, but that's kind of hard to believe (for me, at least. I respect your opinion)

Who, aside from Boston obviously, was going to give Jeff Green, 4 yrs, 36 million last year?

I just don't see why it has to be, who was going to give him the money last year. It's four years for a reason: Ainge believes that Jeff Green will be performing solidly at an average of $9 million, for four years. We're two-thirds of the way into the first year, and there's just no way we can decide if it's a bust or a steal.

At his current playing rate, I'm sure at least 8 teams would pay him $9 mil, guaranteed. And like I said earlier: I'm curious as to what you think "being worth $36 million over 4 years" truly constitutes. In my opinion, market value is how much the market pays, and if a a certain type of player deserves just $5mil/year, but can get offers of $8mil/year from ten teams, then he's an $8mil/year player.

I think his market value is somewhere around $9mil/year, especially if the team signing him gets him locked up for his prime.

my comment was directly to your point on market value.  If no team, aside from Boston, was going to give Jeff Green 4 yrs, 36 million, then Boston did not pay market value.

Agreed. We did not pay market value, we paid higher than market value, for whatever reason. If he turns out to actually be a $9mil/yr player, then great, we got him at his true value. If he plays to be a $7mil/yr player, we screwed up.

What do you think his market value was, and what true value will he play at for the next four (now, three and a third) years?

Given where he was I don't think he would have gotten anything more than the MLE from another team (so basically Lee or Terry's contract).  I've gone on the record many times I wouldn't have given him more than 1 year and would have gone up to 9 million in that 1 year if necessary.  Of course that is mostly because I wouldn't pay my 3rd or 4th option that much money when I don't have a 2nd or 3rd option on the roster (after KG and PP retire or move on, there is just Rondo and a bunch of role players).

  People get caught up in these silly options. Short sample size, but for the last month+ Green's only been scoring a few points a game less than Pierce, yet PP is a #1 option while Green is somehow a 3rd or 4th option.

Pierce is only a #1 option at this point by default.  He is no longer that type of player.  His numbers and efficiency are down and he doesn't have the consistency night in and night any more to be considered a #1.

[chambers]

Playing out of position and off the bench...

You can go back and forth forever on this guy. I see both sides of it.

Which has kind of been my point the whole time. If you are truly honest with yourself and look at the whole Jeff Green package, you should be able to see both the good and the bad. You should be able to see all the reasons for failure but also see the excuses. You should see all the reasons to be hopeful but also see why he could be a false hope.

Personally, given the circumstances I would have handled the Jeff Green contract very differently. I would offered him the same one year/$9 million contract that he signed before having heart issues. If he did well, I would have given him the multi-year deal after he showed me he could perform at that level. That's basically what the C's were doing before.

Why change because of the heart issue? Actually the question should be, why once the heart issue arose did the Celtics go from a conservative attitude of short years and prove you are worth the money to a more liberal and chancy 4 year/$36 million deal?

If Green hedged because he wanted security of more years now that he had the heart issue, I would have offered him about what the Celtics offered Bass, 4 years/$24 million or so.

Your reasoning is weird because you're saying we should have been more conservative & let him prove himself yet you don't take into account the other teams that would willingly pay him way more than 9 million. If he played up to his potential after 1 year do you think there wouldnt be plenty of yeams offering him 11 or 12 million for 3 years ? Danny rolled thedice because he had no choice. Of course Danny wouldve offered him a Bass like deal but his smart agent and the market were obviously offering more.
You have to give a little to get a little and at 9 million Green is either going to be slightly overpaid or underpaid. Perhaps even massively underpaid.
Your reasoning assumes that the Celtics were the only ones in the market, but who knows what other teams were offering. Danny had a price he was willing to go to and they came to an agreement.
If Green starts averaging 20/5/5 then the 9 million per year looks like a steal.