Forsberg on Green

[vinnie]

Really nothing news here: http://espn.go.com/boston/nba/story/_/id/10404303/boston-celtics-jeff-green-struggling-find-comfort-zone

[pokeKingCurtis]

Yeah. It's the same stuff over and over.

I have been a fan of Green.

But he's had many, many opportunities to assert himself this season. But hasn't.

Like I said yesterday, I'm very tempted by Josh Smith for this reason. Smith jacks up too many shots but he also grabs rebounds and assists. Maybe Smith tries too hard...in contrast JG ties too little. Again, there'd probably be frustration, maybe less since Smith is more talented, if we get Smith. Same but different.

As frustrating as watching him play as, I think JG is still a pretty good deal. C's "realists" may call him hot garbage but I think 9m a year is a pretty good deal. Keeping him for a year shortens his contract while allowing us to perhaps hope for some improvement from the guy. Deals like this show how Ainge is a pretty dang good GM.

[bleedGREENdon]

Green and a first for Smith n Villanueva

[Depalma2002]

Green and a first for Smith n Villanueva

1. That's not even a valid trade
2. Puts us way over the luxury tax
3. Are you trying to build a roster of 15 power forwards?

[Jeff]

can't bring myself to write about him again

just can't do it, not for a while or until something changes

[BleedGreen1989]

I believe I've been one of the last guys driving the Jeff Green bandwagon, but I'm leaning towards pulling over to the side of the road.

It's not a knock on Jeff and I'm not "trade him for anything", but Jeff is being asked to do something he simply is not and that's a #1 scorer. He just doesn't fit with this team ATM. If Danny can get future assets/players, I'm for it.

I just don't get the Green hate though. If you ran a restaurant and you asked your line-cook to be an executive chef, would you hate him because he failed?

[PhoSita]

At this point I think the biggest problem where Green is concerned is that people still talk about him having "potential."  He is who he is. 

[mmmmm]

I believe I've been one of the last guys driving the Jeff Green bandwagon, but I'm leaning towards pulling over to the side of the road.

It's not a knock on Jeff and I'm not "trade him for anything", but Jeff is being asked to do something he simply is not and that's a #1 scorer. He just doesn't fit with this team ATM. If Danny can get future assets/players, I'm for it.

I just don't get the Green hate though. If you ran a restaurant and you asked your line-cook to be an executive chef, would you hate him because he failed?

When have the Celtics actually asked Green to be a "#1 scorer"?

Danny came out and said at the start of the year that JG was not going to be our 'go to guy'.   He clarified that by saying we probably wouldn't _have_ a single 'go to guy' and that to put that expectation on Green was unfair.

Brad Stevens' offense has done nothing to undermine Danny's statements.

The offense has _never_ (except for the Wizards game, with Wallace running point much of the game) been focused around or run plays towards feeding touches to Green.

He averages around 13 FGA per game and just 48 touches per game.   On a shots-per-minute basis, he has consistently been about 3rd or 4th on the team.   His USG% rate has been barely over 22% all season - 3rd or 4th among our rotation members for most of the season.   He receives a pass within 12 feet of the hoop barely 1.2 times per game and recieves a pass for a catch-and-shoot barely over 3 times per game.  Basically, the Celtics have run just a little over 4 plays per game for Green (resulting in a little more than 6 points).   All the rest of his points he generates starting from outside on his own, either with drives to the hoop or creating his own outside shot.

Those numbers are not even remotely close to what you would expect for a player being asked to be the '#1 option'.

The "#1 option" on most teams will touch the ball at least 60 times and will get at least 16-18 FGA per game.  They will typically have a USG% rate of at least 25%.   They will have at least 10 or more plays run for them in a typical game.  Usually a lot more.

Whether Green is 'capable' of being a #1 option or not seems kinda irrelevant.   He has not been asked to be that.  He as not been put in a position to be that.

Green has consistently all year been asked (used as) a 3rd or 4th option and he's delivered production roughly about the level of a 2nd option.

I think the 'hate' directed towards Green on this blog is probably due to people lining up early on extremes of whether Green was a potential 'star' or not.   The debates got absurd at times and even a little testy and I think people are not only entrenched but some appear to have projected their emotions over those debates towards Green himself.

[bobbyv]

I believe I've been one of the last guys driving the Jeff Green bandwagon, but I'm leaning towards pulling over to the side of the road.

It's not a knock on Jeff and I'm not "trade him for anything", but Jeff is being asked to do something he simply is not and that's a #1 scorer. He just doesn't fit with this team ATM. If Danny can get future assets/players, I'm for it.

I just don't get the Green hate though. If you ran a restaurant and you asked your line-cook to be an executive chef, would you hate him because he failed?

When have the Celtics actually asked Green to be a "#1 scorer"?

Danny came out and said at the start of the year that JG was not going to be our 'go to guy'.   He clarified that by saying we probably wouldn't _have_ a single 'go to guy' and that to put that expectation on Green was unfair.

Brad Stevens' offense has done nothing to undermine Danny's statements.

The offense has _never_ (except for the Wizards game, with Wallace running point much of the game) been focused around or run plays towards feeding touches to Green.

He averages around 13 FGA per game and just 48 touches per game.   On a shots-per-minute basis, he has consistently been about 3rd or 4th on the team.   His USG% rate has been barely over 22% all season - 3rd or 4th among our rotation members for most of the season.   He receives a pass within 12 feet of the hoop barely 1.2 times per game and recieves a pass for a catch-and-shoot barely over 3 times per game.  Basically, the Celtics have run just a little over 4 plays per game for Green (resulting in a little more than 6 points).   All the rest of his points he generates starting from outside on his own, either with drives to the hoop or creating his own outside shot.

Those numbers are not even remotely close to what you would expect for a player being asked to be the '#1 option'.

The "#1 option" on most teams will touch the ball at least 60 times and will get at least 16-18 FGA per game.  They will typically have a USG% rate of at least 25%.   They will have at least 10 or more plays run for them in a typical game.  Usually a lot more.

Whether Green is 'capable' of being a #1 option or not seems kinda irrelevant.   He has not been asked to be that.  He as not been put in a position to be that.

Green has consistently all year been asked (used as) a 3rd or 4th option and he's delivered production roughly about the level of a 2nd option.

I think the 'hate' directed towards Green on this blog is probably due to people lining up early on extremes of whether Green was a potential 'star' or not.   The debates got absurd at times and even a little testy and I think people are not only entrenched but some appear to have projected their emotions over those debates towards Green himself.

I always appreciate your insight and analysis. However, I just think Green has disappointed a lot of people, me included. His FG% isn't great, and he hasn't been consistent enough. With his talent, he should be averaging 18ppg easily.

Now you are correct in the fact the offense doesn't feature him as a #1 option. However, I still think Green could put up better numbers if he were aggressive each night.

[cb8883]

At this point I think the biggest problem where Green is concerned is that people still talk about him having "potential."  He is who he is.

The Celtics gave up a title run by trading for him. I love potential...a lot but this was the wrong guy to gamble on. Danny made the worst mistake of his career resigning him after trading Perkins for him. Perkins was the ultimate center next to KG. Plus Perk was one of the home grown Celtics on the roster. You can't put a price on that.

[mmmmm]

I believe I've been one of the last guys driving the Jeff Green bandwagon, but I'm leaning towards pulling over to the side of the road.

It's not a knock on Jeff and I'm not "trade him for anything", but Jeff is being asked to do something he simply is not and that's a #1 scorer. He just doesn't fit with this team ATM. If Danny can get future assets/players, I'm for it.

I just don't get the Green hate though. If you ran a restaurant and you asked your line-cook to be an executive chef, would you hate him because he failed?

When have the Celtics actually asked Green to be a "#1 scorer"?

Danny came out and said at the start of the year that JG was not going to be our 'go to guy'.   He clarified that by saying we probably wouldn't _have_ a single 'go to guy' and that to put that expectation on Green was unfair.

Brad Stevens' offense has done nothing to undermine Danny's statements.

The offense has _never_ (except for the Wizards game, with Wallace running point much of the game) been focused around or run plays towards feeding touches to Green.

He averages around 13 FGA per game and just 48 touches per game.   On a shots-per-minute basis, he has consistently been about 3rd or 4th on the team.   His USG% rate has been barely over 22% all season - 3rd or 4th among our rotation members for most of the season.   He receives a pass within 12 feet of the hoop barely 1.2 times per game and recieves a pass for a catch-and-shoot barely over 3 times per game.  Basically, the Celtics have run just a little over 4 plays per game for Green (resulting in a little more than 6 points).   All the rest of his points he generates starting from outside on his own, either with drives to the hoop or creating his own outside shot.

Those numbers are not even remotely close to what you would expect for a player being asked to be the '#1 option'.

The "#1 option" on most teams will touch the ball at least 60 times and will get at least 16-18 FGA per game.  They will typically have a USG% rate of at least 25%.   They will have at least 10 or more plays run for them in a typical game.  Usually a lot more.

Whether Green is 'capable' of being a #1 option or not seems kinda irrelevant.   He has not been asked to be that.  He as not been put in a position to be that.

Green has consistently all year been asked (used as) a 3rd or 4th option and he's delivered production roughly about the level of a 2nd option.

I think the 'hate' directed towards Green on this blog is probably due to people lining up early on extremes of whether Green was a potential 'star' or not.   The debates got absurd at times and even a little testy and I think people are not only entrenched but some appear to have projected their emotions over those debates towards Green himself.

I always appreciate your insight and analysis. However, I just think Green has disappointed a lot of people, me included. His FG% isn't great, and he hasn't been consistent enough. With his talent, he should be averaging 18ppg easily.

Now you are correct in the fact the offense doesn't feature him as a #1 option. However, I still think Green could put up better numbers if he were aggressive each night.

Up until the Jan 13 game against the Rockets, Green's eFG% was a solid 49.8% and his 3PT% was an excellent 37.5%.  He has been at those numbers most of the season.   He hurt his shoulder early in the Rockets game and with the notable exception of the Wizards game, his shooting has sucked since then.  Even including the Wizards game, his eFG% since then has been an abysmal 39.6% and his 3PT% has been a sucky 32.3%.

I think it's highly probable that he's going through a little injury-induced slump.   Over the longer span of all last season, last year's playoffs and the bulk of this season, his shooting percentages have been closer to what they were prior to the Rockets game.

I don't know what folks want when they say, "Green could put up better numbers if he were aggressive enough".   If his FG% is down (for whatever reason), taking more shots is just more inefficient shots.  People would then be mad at him for being a chucker.   And he can't shoot the ball if he doesn't touch the ball.  He's on the floor for about 70 or so offensive possessions per game.  If he's only been touching the ball about 48 times per game, that means there are a couple dozen possessions where the ball never even comes through his hands.   Is Green supposed to go yank it out of his teammate's hands?

If you mean that Green should shoot it more with the touches he has, well, between shot attempts and drives that result in fouls, Green actually attempts a 'scoring play' per touch at about the same rate as guys like Paul George and Lebron.  His points-per-touch rate is .33.  Lebron's is .34.  Paul George's is .32.

Green pretty clearly is not willing to play outside his coach's system.  If that means that he's "not a #1 option" then I guess he isn't.   But I think that expectation is unfair because it is being put on him by (some) fans, not the team.

[jambr380]

At this point I think the biggest problem where Green is concerned is that people still talk about him having "potential."  He is who he is.

The Celtics gave up a title run by trading for him. I love potential...a lot but this was the wrong guy to gamble on. Danny made the worst mistake of his career resigning him after trading Perkins for him. Perkins was the ultimate center next to KG. Plus Perk was one of the home grown Celtics on the roster. You can't put a price on that.

Gave up a title run? Worst mistake of Danny's career? Perk was the 'ultimate' center? Exaggerate much?

Perk was crap that season - he was coming back from major injury (and he still doesn't look the same) and we had two very solid centers in O'Neal and O'Neal and we received Krstic back in the trade who was a very capable player at the time. How was Danny to know that his center crop would become decimated?

Besides, I guess you are just playing the 'butterfly effect' in assuming Wade wouldn't have treated Rondo's elbow like a slinky...

As for Green himself - he is a good player, he has always been a good player, and he will continue to be a good player. It's not his fault that everybody expected him to be the 2nd coming of Lebron.

[Jailan34]

At this point I think the biggest problem where Green is concerned is that people still talk about him having "potential."  He is who he is.

The Celtics gave up a title run by trading for him. I love potential...a lot but this was the wrong guy to gamble on. Danny made the worst mistake of his career resigning him after trading Perkins for him. Perkins was the ultimate center next to KG. Plus Perk was one of the home grown Celtics on the roster. You can't put a price on that.

Gave up a title run? Worst mistake of Danny's career? Perk was the 'ultimate' center? Exaggerate much?

Perk was crap that season - he was coming back from major injury (and he still doesn't look the same) and we had two very solid centers in O'Neal and O'Neal and we received Krstic back in the trade who was a very capable player at the time. How was Danny to know that his center crop would become decimated?

Besides, I guess you are just playing the 'butterfly effect' in assuming Wade wouldn't have treated Rondo's elbow like a slinky...

As for Green himself - he is a good player, he has always been a good player, and he will continue to be a good player. It's not his fault that everybody expected him to be the 2nd coming of Lebron.

I would've rather let Perk walk in free agency than trade him for Green, whatever his individual skill may be he fit in well with our team and it had a certain chemistry that was not evident on paper.

[green147]

I believe I've been one of the last guys driving the Jeff Green bandwagon, but I'm leaning towards pulling over to the side of the road.

It's not a knock on Jeff and I'm not "trade him for anything", but Jeff is being asked to do something he simply is not and that's a #1 scorer. He just doesn't fit with this team ATM. If Danny can get future assets/players, I'm for it.

I just don't get the Green hate though. If you ran a restaurant and you asked your line-cook to be an executive chef, would you hate him because he failed?

TP for being rational. People want to hate on what he isn't, instead of being happy what he is...a good player. He isn't a superstar, but shipping him out for pennies is a mistake. If he's your leading scorer you're 16-33, but if he's your number 3 scorer, your team is going to be pretty darn good. We can't have a youth movement if Rondo is leading the team so why give him up unless it's to help get that go to scorer/star?

[cltc5]

At this point I think the biggest problem where Green is concerned is that people still talk about him having "potential."  He is who he is.

The Celtics gave up a title run by trading for him. I love potential...a lot but this was the wrong guy to gamble on. Danny made the worst mistake of his career resigning him after trading Perkins for him. Perkins was the ultimate center next to KG. Plus Perk was one of the home grown Celtics on the roster. You can't put a price on that.

Gave up a title run? Worst mistake of Danny's career? Perk was the 'ultimate' center? Exaggerate much?

Perk was crap that season - he was coming back from major injury (and he still doesn't look the same) and we had two very solid centers in O'Neal and O'Neal and we received Krstic back in the trade who was a very capable player at the time. How was Danny to know that his center crop would become decimated?

Besides, I guess you are just playing the 'butterfly effect' in assuming Wade wouldn't have treated Rondo's elbow like a slinky...

As for Green himself - he is a good player, he has always been a good player, and he will continue to be a good player. It's not his fault that everybody expected him to be the 2nd coming of Lebron.

But it is his fault putting on an all star game one night, getting peoples hopes up then layin an egg the next 3 nights.