Jeff Green's Trajectory
- Thread starter wutang112878
- Start date
I'd be more inclined to believe that Jeff Green is about to make a leap if he had a Kevin Martin-like breakout playoff performance. But he basically performed as he did during the regular season, which is fine, but not anything that you want to build your team on. The best comparison that I can think of is James Posey at around the same age (Memphis).
How do people view Green as an upside guy when he is 26 (27 by start of season) and has not really developed at all since he entered the league? Mentioning him in the same breath as Paul George, a kid who has clearly improved his game since his time at Fresno State, is insane. George is 23 (barely) and has improved his game every year. Green is older and has shown that his ceiling is maybe 18 points and 6 rebounds. An OK piece for sure, but not a first or second option on a contender.amarshal2 said:
fairlee76 said:
This is Jeff Green's conundrum......he isn't good enough to be a 1-2 option on a contender yet he needs to be a focal point of the offense to be at his best otherwise he drifts when not engaged in the offense. His best career role will likely be that of a 1-2 option on a lottery-type team as he isn't a very good role player.
fairlee76 said:
This is my biggest issue with thinking he has upside as well. He basically had 53 games where he looked really good, and he wasnt even starting. During this time he took 543 shots or ~10 shots a game, and we should all be excited? Sure he came back from a big injury, but going from 53 hot games ( or 13% of his career) to 'this is what he is going to be going forward' seems like a huge leap to me.
I'd be happy with the Green we saw the last 30-35 games of last season. The issue as I see it is whether or not he will regress to what he was before that. And his scoring numbers are only part of the picture. IMHO his defense on the ball is quite good against either 3's or 4's. He's never been a great rebounder, but that's less of an issue when he's at the 3.
Paul George is obviously a stretch, he's turned into one of the upper echelon players in the league, but you guys are awfully down on Jeff Green. He returned to this pre-injury trajectory late last season. Of course, it could be a blip in the radar, but he was scoring 17 a game while shooting a high percentage for two months at the end of the season. His rebounding is an issue, but an efficient 17ppg is not an insignificant contribution. This is a minor uptick on what he was doing in Oklahoma, and it makes sense because his usage went back toward 13 or so shots a game.
I think he's a useful 3rd best player on a very good team. He's probably more of a trade asset than anything, but if he repeats his post ASB performance for the first half of next season, he's going to become pretty valuable to a contender. Which is great considering how much his value had tanked. Would it really shock anyone if he became a nearly 20ppg player on 48% or so shooting for the first half of next season? He'd probably have to average about 16-18 shots a game, which seems entirely doable given our other offensive options this coming season. I don't know how comfortable he is being a primary or secondary option since he's never really had that role to this point, but it's kind of an interesting experiment to see what happens if you really up his usage this coming season. The rate stats, minus the rebounding, are all there. Can he keep them with a higher usage rate? If he does, he's going to at least look like a near all-star, which will again be very valuable in trade at the very least.
I think he's a useful 3rd best player on a very good team. He's probably more of a trade asset than anything, but if he repeats his post ASB performance for the first half of next season, he's going to become pretty valuable to a contender. Which is great considering how much his value had tanked. Would it really shock anyone if he became a nearly 20ppg player on 48% or so shooting for the first half of next season? He'd probably have to average about 16-18 shots a game, which seems entirely doable given our other offensive options this coming season. I don't know how comfortable he is being a primary or secondary option since he's never really had that role to this point, but it's kind of an interesting experiment to see what happens if you really up his usage this coming season. The rate stats, minus the rebounding, are all there. Can he keep them with a higher usage rate? If he does, he's going to at least look like a near all-star, which will again be very valuable in trade at the very least.
teddykgb said:
I'm a Green fan in that Ainge acquired him in a steal for a cripple who he had no intentions (correctly so) of resigning in Perkins. He is a good player but has his limitations and doesn't have an alpha dog personality. Without that approach you are looking at a good 3rd or 4th option but the problem is that Green requires the ball in his hands to be effective.......which isn't going to be the case as a 3rd or 4th option unless he's utilized in a 6th man supersub Al Harrington-like (in his prime) role. His effectiveness really is team dependent as he gets lost on many units.
teddykgb said:
Can you help me understand what his pre-injury trajectory is/was?
I see a guy who had 4 amazing months in comparison to the body of work for his career. In his yearly numbers, I dont see continual improvement or any real improvement, save for shooting % wise he pretty much looks like the same guy, except for those amazing 4 months
FG% 3 FG% PPG
Nov 2013 : 42.1 / 29.2 / 8.7
Dec 2013 : 41.4 / 32.4 / 11.4
Jan 2013 : 48.5 / 34.5 / 9.3
Feb 2013 : 51.2 / 41.4 / 15.3
Mar 2013 : 48.8 / 42.6 / 17.6
Apr 2013 : 49.1 / 52.6 / 17.1
2007-08 : 42.7 / 27.6 / 10.5
2008-09 : 44.6 / 38.9 / 16.5
2009-10 : 45.3 / 33.3 / 15.1
2010-11 : 44.9 / 30.3 / 13.3 ( Season #s)
2010-11 : 43.7 / 30.4 / 15.2 ( OKC #s)
2010-11 : 48.5 / 29.6 / 9.8 ( BOS #s)
2012-13 : 46.7 / 38.5 / 12.8
Career : 44.9 / 34.5 / 13.6
I mean, it's right there in your post, but I guess I can explain what I meant.
Pre-trade he showed a natural progression: 10ppg to 16 to 15 (but predominantly on a bad year shooting the 3). He looks to be a mid to high teens scorer with improving shooting percentages. 10-11 he regresses a bit, gets traded and turtles, and everything falls off a cliff in Boston. Early last season he wasn't back to being the player he had been in OKC, and then he hits the post ASB and he's a 17PPG player with some higher 2pt and 3pt %. All I'm really saying is he returned to his previous performance levels with a slight boost, which is what you'd expect out of a maturing player who maybe actually made it all the way back. Maybe it's all a small sample size mirage and I don't really disagree with anything HRB said, but I'm not rushing to denigrate what his actual upside output is: he's a very very very useful player if he can score 17-19 a game, given his relatively low usage rates to get there.
Pre-trade he showed a natural progression: 10ppg to 16 to 15 (but predominantly on a bad year shooting the 3). He looks to be a mid to high teens scorer with improving shooting percentages. 10-11 he regresses a bit, gets traded and turtles, and everything falls off a cliff in Boston. Early last season he wasn't back to being the player he had been in OKC, and then he hits the post ASB and he's a 17PPG player with some higher 2pt and 3pt %. All I'm really saying is he returned to his previous performance levels with a slight boost, which is what you'd expect out of a maturing player who maybe actually made it all the way back. Maybe it's all a small sample size mirage and I don't really disagree with anything HRB said, but I'm not rushing to denigrate what his actual upside output is: he's a very very very useful player if he can score 17-19 a game, given his relatively low usage rates to get there.
I'm a Green fan in that Ainge acquired him in a steal for a cripple who he had no intentions (correctly so) of resigning in Perkins. He is a good player but has his limitations and doesn't have an alpha dog personality. Without that approach you are looking at a good 3rd or 4th option but the problem is that Green requires the ball in his hands to be effective.......which isn't going to be the case as a 3rd or 4th option unless he's utilized in a 6th man supersub Al Harrington-like (in his prime) role. His effectiveness really is team dependent as he gets lost on many units.
Which is why this season may be the perfect storm for Ainge/Stevens. Get the ball in Green's hands and pump up his numbers and then trade him mid-season to someone looking for additional scoring.
I don't see Green as part of the C's long term plans.
Which is why this season may be the perfect storm for Ainge/Stevens. Get the ball in Green's hands and pump up his numbers and then trade him mid-season to someone looking for additional scoring.
I don't see Green as part of the C's long term plans.
teddykgb said:
Going back to your previous post, when you said "He returned to this pre-injury trajectory late last season" could you substitute trajectory with "career norms"? Thats what was throwing me for a loop, when I think trajectory I think of a upward curve or progression, I wouldnt describe Green that way.
There are a few ways to look at Green, what Green really can do for this basketball team and the value Green might have to other GMs. I am all for giving Green more shots so he scores more and looks more valuable to other GMs, and I think he can be showcased here and increase his value. My critique is what Green can do to impact this franchise, and I think thats very little. He can score, but I dont think he can really impact the game (over the long term) and he cant make his teammates better. He also isnt a great role player and the team sort of has to make an effort to keep him involved. I dont see any value in keeping a guy like that
Jeff Green's likely role on the next contending Celtics team is as a trade chip two years from now.
My eyes tell me he's more suited to scoring 25 a night on a terrible team than being a complementary player on a good team. The advanced metrics people are citing here tend to bear that out -- he's at his best when he doesn't have to share the stage with star players. But that's OK -- we're in no danger of being good the next couple of seasons. Green will be fun to watch, he won't interfere with the rebuilding process (his attitude and effort are good), and if things break right, Danny will flip him for something useful in the summer of 2015.
My eyes tell me he's more suited to scoring 25 a night on a terrible team than being a complementary player on a good team. The advanced metrics people are citing here tend to bear that out -- he's at his best when he doesn't have to share the stage with star players. But that's OK -- we're in no danger of being good the next couple of seasons. Green will be fun to watch, he won't interfere with the rebuilding process (his attitude and effort are good), and if things break right, Danny will flip him for something useful in the summer of 2015.
My eyes told me that during the latter part of last year he was the second best player on the team (after KG). But I suppose its debatable whether or not last year's Celtics sans Rondo and Sullinger was a "good" team. It probably wasn't.
His ability to D up and shoot the three have made me think he is like a less-crazy Stephen Jackson. On the rare occasion, he can look like a top 15 player in the league.
maufman said:
He has scored 25 or more points in a game 12 times in 400 career games. Regardless of who else is on his team, Jeff Green is not going to score 25 points a night.
Captaincoop said:
Fair enough. 20 a night?
Green averaged 16.2 ppg in his final 38 games last season. There will be lots more shots to go around this season with Garnett, Pierce and Terry all gone (1st, 2nd, and 4th on the team in FGA), and with a lot of the replacement minutes likely to go to low-usage guys.
I could maybe see him scoring around 20 a night, if the team is truly awful. Someone has to take the shots.
My God, is this going to be a brutal team to watch.
My God, is this going to be a brutal team to watch.
Closest thing to that last season was when Pierce and Green were on the floor at the same time with 2 bigs.
Of the top 20 lineups featuring Green, only 2 had that combination:
Bradley-Pierce-Green-Bass-Wilcox (73 minutes, 3rd most common Green lineup)
Bradley-Pierce-Green-Bass-Garnett (37 minutes, 10th most common Green lineup)
http://www.82games.com/1213/12BOS10.HTM
The former was one of the worst lineups featuring Green.
I assume we'll only really see it used before Rondo returns - some combination of Bradley-Green-Wallace-Bass/Olynyk/Sullinger-Humphries.
God this team is going to be so bad.
Of the top 20 lineups featuring Green, only 2 had that combination:
Bradley-Pierce-Green-Bass-Wilcox (73 minutes, 3rd most common Green lineup)
Bradley-Pierce-Green-Bass-Garnett (37 minutes, 10th most common Green lineup)
http://www.82games.com/1213/12BOS10.HTM
The former was one of the worst lineups featuring Green.
I assume we'll only really see it used before Rondo returns - some combination of Bradley-Green-Wallace-Bass/Olynyk/Sullinger-Humphries.
God this team is going to be so bad.
Let Green take 30 shots a night. I'd prefer to go 0-82. This seems the way to do it. He's a good 3rd-4th option on a good team. He's the clear cut 1 option here. please please please go 10-72
Given the alternative options for those shots, I think you've got this wrong.southshoresoxfan said:
fairlee76 said:
He has been forced to play out of position his entire career, missed a year for open heart surgery and has never been in an offense that played to his strengths. I'm not saying that he is going to improve, just that those are the arguments in favor of Jeff Green possibly developing despite his age.
The concern for me is that there is a reason he has never been in an offense that played to his strengths; his skill set simply isn't that useful.
moly99 said:
Green's PER as a PF last year was 20.6. As a 3, it was 9.4. He can't defend the 4 though, so I expect the C's to play a lot of lineups where Green plays the 4 on offense, but has Wallace defend the other team's 4 on the other end.
radsoxfan said:
Yeah, it's sort of an odd decision because presumably when you shift him to the 2, Wallace plays the 3, and his 3/4 PER splits last year were almost as pronounced as Green's (10.7 at the 3 vs. 16.9 at the 4). But the C's have so many true 4's (Bass, Humphries, Olynyk, Sullinger) that I'm not sure there's any alternative.
moly99 said:
He has been forced to play out of position, because he doesnt have a true position. As for not being in an offense that plays to his strengths, its not the system or the skill set its the general skill. As Marty pointed out, when he is guarded by a 4 he is great, but becomes very average when guarded by a 3, so for Green to thrive he needs to get matched up with a 4 on offense, but matched up with a 3 on defense, thats ridiculous. Guys that need specific situations like that to excel cant be your 1st or 2nd best player, and guys that are your 3rd or 4th best player need to 'fit in' not have a system designed around them.
This year will be unique because after Rondo he is probably our next best player, so they can indeed build things around him a bit in the hopes of increasing his trade value. If they do this, this is going to be the ideal situation for Green to showcase his skills, and if he cant get it done this year then he simply is what he is.
Grin&MartyBarret said:
I have been thinking about this 2 thing for a while and I am still kind of puzzled. Defensively, I dont know if he can stay in front of 2s, but if he can be adequate at that I wonder if they think his length might make up for our lack of bigs in some way? Offensively, I wonder if they hope they can get him matched up with 2s and then have him work in the post or just back them down? I am really interested to see what they do with him at the 2, its baffling.
I don't get the pessimism. Green does a pretty good job on LeBron, and if he can do that, he ought to be able to defend the majority of shooting guards. And when the other team trots out an undersized shooter at sg (e.g. Gordon, Reddick, Mayo, Wade, Curry), that player will have to shoot over Green and also cope with the 6-9 Green at the other end. If Green posts up against players like that he will have to be double teamed.
Lebron is one of the, if not the, most unique player in the NBA, guarding Lebron and traditional 2s are fundamentally different things. Lebron isnt being run off picks and isnt really a spot up shooter, thats what Green is going to be asked to guard.
The flipside of the Green mismatch on defense is that Green also has to chase those guys, and if he is a half a stride stride slower than a typical 2 defender, it will be easy to shoot over him because he wont be there.
Offensively, things are starting to make a little more sense for me, if Green is posting up a 2 who is under 6' 3" the guy wont really be able to guard him and yes he will be doubled. Usually a double in the post results in a kick out and after a pass or two when the defense cant react quickly enough the end result is an open jumper (generally a 3) but we dont have anyone to efficiently take that open jumper. So we would have to do a lot of cutting and driving to the basket, but that isnt nearly as effective as the open jumper because you are running right back into the area with the 2 guys who were doubling. Stevens is going to earn every penny of what he is paid this year because with the horrible mix of talent he has on this roster he is going to run into strategic issues like this left and right
The flipside of the Green mismatch on defense is that Green also has to chase those guys, and if he is a half a stride stride slower than a typical 2 defender, it will be easy to shoot over him because he wont be there.
Offensively, things are starting to make a little more sense for me, if Green is posting up a 2 who is under 6' 3" the guy wont really be able to guard him and yes he will be doubled. Usually a double in the post results in a kick out and after a pass or two when the defense cant react quickly enough the end result is an open jumper (generally a 3) but we dont have anyone to efficiently take that open jumper. So we would have to do a lot of cutting and driving to the basket, but that isnt nearly as effective as the open jumper because you are running right back into the area with the 2 guys who were doubling. Stevens is going to earn every penny of what he is paid this year because with the horrible mix of talent he has on this roster he is going to run into strategic issues like this left and right
His defense isn't going to matter. Get him 24 PPG on 30 shots and trade him mid-season. I have to believe that's the plan.
Yes, they're fundamentally different, but IMHO defending LeBron is considerably more difficult than defending the average (or even better than average) NBA 2 guard.wutang112878 said:
The difference is that LeBron comes off picks with the ball, not without it. His defender still has to fight through the pick. My view is that Green at the two is an experiment worth trying. And if it doesn't work, most folks here wouldn't be adverse to losing a few more games.
As for the "plan" for Green, I don't think they have a plan because they don't know what they have. And that's pretty much the case for every player on the roster.
I think the plan is first to evaluate, and to defer decisions until the evaluations are complete.
Grin&MartyBarret said:
I think this is a bit misleading, though, because he seems (in my eyes, at least) to have been successful at the 4 mostly when the team was playing small ball where he was able to run the court more rather than playing out of the post as a traditional power forward. In my eyes he still counts as a small forward if you are playing small ball.
wutang112878 said:
I agree. I don't think he has a viable role in the NBA. He isn't a good enough outside shooter or post scorer. He doesn't have the ancillary skills needed to be a good role player (can't rebound, shoot the 3 at an above average rate or defend multiple positions) nor does he have the dominating scoring moves needed to be a primary or secondary scorer.
I am not saying that Green will be any good, just that those are the arguments (missed a year, out of position, forced to play half-court when he doesn't have good half-court skills) he could be.
Who knows? He's 6-9 and does everything reasonably well except rebound (for a 6-9 player). He's difficult to pidgeonhole. Maybe Rivers couldn't see the forest for the trees. Let's see how Stephens uses him.moly99 said:
Its only preseason, only one game, everyone had a bad game and we were playing the Raptors the elite of the elite but:
2 for 7 shooting, 3 turnovers and 1 rebound in 23 minutes Being positive he had 2 assists, a block and 2 steals
2 for 7 shooting, 3 turnovers and 1 rebound in 23 minutes Being positive he had 2 assists, a block and 2 steals
Green absolutely sucked last night. It was his classic disappearing act. If he continues to play like that, he'll be less tradeable than Gerald Wallace (who actually played well, as did Sullinger).wutang112878 said:
Anybody get an impression of Vitor Faverani? The stat line suggests he was fairly active. On a terrible team without many compelling story lines other than where we draft, he might be one of the more interesting guys to follow this year.
My initial impression was that Faverani is better than Fab Melo, which isn't saying much. Also, Faverani is not afraid to bang.
Brickowski said:
Just watched highlights of tonight's game and saw Faverani (who put up 11/6 in 20 minutes on 5/9 shooting) with a nice lefty jam off a pick and roll, running the floor well and scoring in transition, and draining a step back three. I realize he's already 25 and didn't exactly light up Spain but this guy might actually have some game to go along with legit center size.
I watched a few minutes of the game last night on NBA network and they were talking about him. Specifically that banging in the paint is a big part of his game and that he enjoys it. If that's truly the case then he'll provide valuable minutes in the NBA for a while.Morgan's Magic Snowplow said:
This thread needs a bump.
Thus far this season Green has averaged 11.3 FGA (same as career average), 42.6 FG% (below career average), 35.0 3PTFG% (just above career average), 4.2 rebounds (below career average) and 14.5 PPG (almost 1 point above career average). Overall not bad, but still effectively just the Jeff Green we have already seen.
To add to the intrigue, is the bad, tentative Jeff Green coming back? Last 2 games: 13 FGA, 2 FG Made, 6 total points, just completely vanished
Thus far this season Green has averaged 11.3 FGA (same as career average), 42.6 FG% (below career average), 35.0 3PTFG% (just above career average), 4.2 rebounds (below career average) and 14.5 PPG (almost 1 point above career average). Overall not bad, but still effectively just the Jeff Green we have already seen.
To add to the intrigue, is the bad, tentative Jeff Green coming back? Last 2 games: 13 FGA, 2 FG Made, 6 total points, just completely vanished
Jeff Green was born to be a sixth man. I think he fooled us last year because he was coming off the bench as a swing forward and was allowed to do a lot of his damage against subs. Unfortunately he isn't a primary scorer and this was my big fear with this team, that when teams had the luxury of focusing on Jeff Green the Celtics were in trouble.
I agree 6th man is his ideal role, he brings about a lot of matchup problems when coming off the bench. I will admit his numbers for the first 12 games were indeed better than I expected considering the defensive focus he now has to face
I honestly don't understand how it's possible for him to attempt only 13 FG in 2 games. He's the closest thing this team has to a primary scorer, he should probably get that many shots in a single game almost regardless of effectiveness.
Last night was ugly, which hasn't been the case in most games this season. They've generally played disciplined basketball and gave their all. Ton of awful 3s in the game last night, they were demoralized from the get go and seemed to think the rock and jock 50 point baskets were going to drop so they should wait for those.
Last night was ugly, which hasn't been the case in most games this season. They've generally played disciplined basketball and gave their all. Ton of awful 3s in the game last night, they were demoralized from the get go and seemed to think the rock and jock 50 point baskets were going to drop so they should wait for those.