Ainge: Fans expectations of Jeff Green are not right

[Boston Garden Leprechaun]

He has said this many times ,and I agree , he is a role player.

Saying that, it doesn't make any sense to keep him on this roster. He makes us just good enough to fall out of the top 5 in this years lottery. He is not a key piece moving forward, and takes up a good chunk of the salary cap.

I fully expect danny to try and move him before the deadline.

BINGO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[RockinRyA]

Ainge has a misunderstanding of fans expectations.  I don't think anyone expects Green to score 25-30 every night, but there certainly should be an expectation of more consistency within his numbers.  He shouldn't have numbers that look like this:

39
16
8
14
18
8
36

That is too much of a yo-yo.  That is the issue.  Now granted his shot attempts are certainly more consistent, but his foul shot attempts are not (which is indicative of his lack of aggression a lot). 

I think this is pretty much what you get from NBA players outside of superstars (such as Lebron, Durant, etc).

Philly use to get similar numbers from Andre Iguodala - some nights he'll give you 25, others he'll give you 9. 

It's the same deal with Bradley and Sullinger.  22 one night, 7 the next.

That is what separates elite superstar players from good rotation players.  The superstar guys have that elite level of talent that allows them to dominate their matchups pretty much every night, no matter who is agaisnt them.  The quality starters are guys who are capable of having big nights when they are feeling hot or have certain matchups, but aren't dominant enough to be able to do it every night.

I think Ainge is perfectly on point here. 

I'm willing to be there are a lot of teams out there who'd be pretty content having Jeff Green (as he is) as their starting SF.  I think Miami would love having a lineup of Chalmers-Wade-Green-Lebron-Bosh if they had the opportunity.

That's what Ive been saying all along, yet people refuse to see it and holds him to the PP standard

[mmmmm]

There is aggressive shots and then there are the shots Green takes. Now I could be wrong (wouldn't be the first time) but how many times is Green taking 3s instead of going at the rim like Lebron? It's easier to slam it home than it is hitting the 3... Green's best games are when he starts out going inside, whether he makes the shot or not, then it opens it up for the rest of his game. You can see when Green is going to have a big quarter or game almost every time, he starts by going in and getting fouled or a dunk. Then the games where he just gets like 16pts or less, you just see him standing around the 3pt line and he rarely goes inside. He needs to muck it up more, it's like he gets a jolt of energy when he gets bumped up a bit early in the game.

Lebron averages 6.9 drives per game, or .092 drives per touch.   Relative to his FGA's that's .41 drives per FGA.

Green averages 3.9 drives per game, or .081 drives per touch.  Relative to his FGA's that's .29 drivers per FGA.

So, yes, relative to Lebron, Green has driven to the hoop less aggressively.

George averages 3.7 drives per game, or 0.052 drives per touch.  Relative to his FGA's that's just 0.21 drives per FGA.

So, maybe Lebron is simply a tough yardstick to measure against?   Let's face it, Lebron gets gifted with foul calls at a ridiculous rate.  That can probably give you extra motivation and confidence to drive, knowing that no matter what happens, you'll get to the free throw line...

In tonight's game, Green scored in the opposite sense to what you described.  He started out by trying to make 3PT shots but was stone cold.   For the game, he was only 2 of 8 from 3PT land.  But he still ended up scoring 17 because he started going more aggressively to the hoop later in the game.

I don't think there is a single pattern to it.  I think it depends on what the defense gives him and whether his shot is working or not for him.   I'm just glad that he doesn't take a lot of inefficient 2PT jumpers.

[Fan from VT]

There is aggressive shots and then there are the shots Green takes. Now I could be wrong (wouldn't be the first time) but how many times is Green taking 3s instead of going at the rim like Lebron? It's easier to slam it home than it is hitting the 3... Green's best games are when he starts out going inside, whether he makes the shot or not, then it opens it up for the rest of his game. You can see when Green is going to have a big quarter or game almost every time, he starts by going in and getting fouled or a dunk. Then the games where he just gets like 16pts or less, you just see him standing around the 3pt line and he rarely goes inside. He needs to muck it up more, it's like he gets a jolt of energy when he gets bumped up a bit early in the game.

Lebron averages 6.9 drives per game, or .092 drives per touch.   Relative to his FGA's that's .41 drives per FGA.

Green averages 3.9 drives per game, or .081 drives per touch.  Relative to his FGA's that's .29 drivers per FGA.

So, yes, relative to Lebron, Green has driven to the hoop less aggressively.

George averages 3.7 drives per game, or 0.052 drives per touch.  Relative to his FGA's that's just 0.21 drives per FGA.

So, maybe Lebron is simply a tough yardstick to measure against?   Let's face it, Lebron gets gifted with foul calls at a ridiculous rate.  That can probably give you extra motivation and confidence to drive, knowing that no matter what happens, you'll get to the free throw line...

In tonight's game, Green scored in the opposite sense to what you described.  He started out by trying to make 3PT shots but was stone cold.   For the game, he was only 2 of 8 from 3PT land.  But he still ended up scoring 17 because he started going more aggressively to the hoop later in the game.

I don't think there is a single pattern to it.  I think it depends on what the defense gives him and whether his shot is working or not for him.   I'm just glad that he doesn't take a lot of inefficient 2PT jumpers.

I agree James is a tough yardstick for Green, but it's because he's really really good.

[Fan from VT]

My problem with Ainge's comments are that he's probably right, which makes this kind of a "bad" contract.

The NBA has a very restrictive salary structure that really favors teams over players and in a way is very conducive to super teams and anti competitive balance.

The first major problem is Max Contracts. Gone over this before, but there are many annoying things about max contracts. First, it makes talking about salaries annoying. The max is set, but who is worth the max? Well clearly Lebron and Durant are worth the max. But then we get into all these discussion about "player X isn't worth the max, he's worse than Lebron!" But the problem, clearly, is that Lebron is, in basketball terms, worth probably 2 times the max. So it's not the Randolphs, etc. who are overpaid, it's James/Durant who are underpaid. Now, in terms of competitive balance, because of the cap, it makes it possible for 2-3 James/Durant level players to be on the same team, which would be impossible in a Team Salary Cap but Individual Salary Free Market System.

The second wrinkle is the extremely restrictive and relatively lengthy rookie contract scale. Absolutely controlled for 4 years, and semi-controlled for a 5th. This frequently locks in great players at prices insanely below market value.


So the above points are key in understanding why I think Green's "Fair Value" contract is a bad contract.

My reasoning:

1. There is a finite amount you can spend on players (i.e. the cap) and money spent on one player is money unavailable for another.

2. Contracts are guaranteed, both ways.

3. There is an individual max contract

4. There are set rookie salaries

5. Because of 2, 3, and 4, you have to find certain kinds of "Value" to gain a competitive advantage and build a winning team. These values are:

Tier 1: Franchise Changing:
a. Elite player underpaid on a Max Deal (James, Durant, George, Harden, Paul, etc.)

b. Great players who are good really quickly, thus the team could conceivably contend while the player is on a rookie deal (George recently, Rose recently, Anthony Davis (but the team sucks).

Tier 2: Great Deals:
a. Borderline max players who lock in below max value (Rondo, Milsap, Horford, Noah)

b. Mid to upper-level players who lock in at barely above solid rookie deals to just above midlevel deals; Sometimes 1 year deals for ring chasers/value boosters (Tony Allen, Perkins' first extension, Posey, House, Conley)

c. Solid rookies who contribute like mid-level guys but are controlled, so easy to fit onto a packed contender (Kawai Leonard, Taj Gibson pre-extension, Jimmy Butler)

Tier 3: Fair Value:
a. Borderline max guys who sign for the max (David Lee)

b. Known non-max guys who sign for close to double figures, about their "market" value (Ibaka, Green)

c. Journeymen established true role players who sign for fair value at or below MLE deals and/or useful rookies who enter the leauge about appropriately paid (Korver/Dudley types).

Tier 4: Consensus overpaid:
Guys like Rudy Gay

Tier 5: Apocalyptic:
Perkins now, Amare, etc.


So when building a great team, you really want to be working in Tier 1, Tier 2, and supplement it with tier 3(c). Once you start adding in too many tier 3(a), tier 3(b) players, it just takes up too much capspace to build good teams without a ton of luck. End up with tier 4+5 players, and you should probably actively try to dump and rebuild. With tier 3(a)/3(b) players, unless you are actively contending you probably should get future assets for such a player if you can. (you could argue that Ray Allen in '08 was a tier 3(a), but with KG/Pierce tier 1(a), Rondo tier 1(b), and Perk tier 2(b), Posey/House/Cassell tier 2(b) or 3(c), and even Powe/Davis as tier 2(c). So it was an overwhelmingly underpaid team (even pierce and KG were underpaid, because of the artificial max constraints) that could therefore make up for Allen's "fair value" deal).

So that's my thoughts of how a "fair" contract can end up being detrimental to competing for a title, because most title teams are working in various portions of the "underpaid" tiers without many highly-but-fairly-paid guys.

[bleedGREENdon]

I would love to see Green playing SG with a legit scoring SF who wants to score, with todo at the point.

Kind of like how he was with Paul pierce, but rondo was injured.
If rondo wasn't injured and we had a lineup of

Rondo
Green
Pierce
KG
Center

We would've been a title contender last year. Might have beaten Indiana, or the heat. But isn't what happened. But pair jeff green with an aggressive SG or SF or a Scoring Big with rondo at the point, we'd be good.

What I'm trying to say is, green is a piece on a championship team, he's not THE piece of a championship team.
I don't see Danny just giving Geeen away. If we get an exciting offer for him, then we trade him if not, we need to keep him.

I wouldn't be surprised if he let's Avery walk and drafts Wiggins/Parker/Embiid and keeps green.

[Future Celtics Owner]

I do not believe our expectations are wrong. Why all of a sudden is it our fault he is under performing? I mean he, scale, kg, da, and everyone were raving about him especially 2nd half of last year. Its not OUR fault he has gotten worse.

[PhoSita]

I do not believe our expectations are wrong. Why all of a sudden is it our fault he is under performing? I mean he, scale, kg, da, and everyone were raving about him especially 2nd half of last year. Its not OUR fault he has gotten worse.

That's the thing.  Jeff Green hasn't gotten worse.  He's been more or less the same player over the course of his career; he's just streaky.  He has months where he strings together more stand out games, and other months where he has more disappearing act games. 

Fan perceptions of Jeff are just easily skewed because the high scoring performances and highlight dunks stand out far more than his many pedestrian nights.