PDA

View Full Version : Gerald Green Wants Out of Minnesota



Kofi
01-26-2008, 12:04 PM
I just saw this on RealGM. He's not exactly living up to his pre-draft hype, but he's a young guard with some promise.

The Wolves declined his option and he's getting no playing time, so it appears they have no interest in him. His trade value is low.

Harrison for Green, anyone?

He's a free agent at seasons end, so worst case scenario we can just let him walk. Low risk, high reward. I'd at least inquire about it if I were Larry Bird.

Shade
01-26-2008, 12:14 PM
I'd do Harrison for Green in a heartbeat.

jeffg-body
01-26-2008, 12:17 PM
Interesting idea, I would do it.

Anthem
01-26-2008, 12:26 PM
Would Minny, though?

I think we'd all agree that we'd move Harrison for loose change if we could, despite the fact that the one thing this team doesn't need is another raw swingman.

Oneal07
01-26-2008, 12:30 PM
YEs they would, they need a big body beside Al Jefferson :) lol

BostonConnection
01-26-2008, 02:08 PM
After watching Green play for a couple of seasons here in Boston, I'm not sure that I want him. Lots of talent, but Bender-level basketball IQ. But I agree that a Harrison for Green trade would be about the right amount of risk to take on him.

sweabs
01-26-2008, 02:38 PM
Remember when some were upset we didn't take Green over Granger in the draft?

JayRedd
01-26-2008, 03:09 PM
Whatever...he's not good.

BoomBaby33
01-26-2008, 03:27 PM
Well, I like the trade,but he would make the 458th sf/sg.

We already have Stephen Graham anyway, who is as good as Green, but Stephen doesnt get any PT.

For these reasons, I dont like this trade right now.

LG33
01-26-2008, 03:37 PM
We can't trade Harrison. We need someone to provide comic relief.

Oneal07
01-26-2008, 04:19 PM
LMAO. . .Why that would be something we need, we could trade Williams for Green. We need more athletic guys who can attack the basket when the shots aren't fallin'. And we don't have J.O.

Anthem
01-26-2008, 06:42 PM
Whatever...he's not good.
Neither is Harrison, who I'd be happy if we cut. It would basically be like getting the dude for free.

grace
01-26-2008, 07:01 PM
Would Minny, though?

Considering that McHale sent Kevin Garnet to his good friend Danny Ainge in Boston I don't see why he wouldn't send something to best bud Larry in Indy.

Kofi
01-26-2008, 09:09 PM
For all the talk that he looks instinct and basketball IQ, he's actually been a fairly productive player in what time he's been given in his career.

His career three-point percentage is higher than Kareem Rush's (36.8 vs 36.1) and would rank third on our team, behind only Granger (37.4) and Owens (40.4).

A guy that young, with his athleticism, who can shoot, would be worth taking a chance on.

ajbry
01-26-2008, 09:19 PM
I'd do it. But I think I've made it clear that Gerald is worth giving a look. Dude hasn't developed as some had anticipated but his overall skillset at this point is pretty nice and given a consistent, established role his knowledge for the game may increase.

Harrison is worthless anyway, might as well move his sorry *** for somebody interesting.

Jose Slaughter
01-26-2008, 09:24 PM
McHale is just stupid enough to let this guy walk, too bad Bird has been trained to only make a move when its your last option.

JayRedd
01-26-2008, 09:28 PM
Neither is Harrison, who I'd be happy if we cut. It would basically be like getting the dude for free.

Well...It's not like Harrison for Green is realistic. I imagine there may be one of the other 28 GMs in the League that will offer something better than a recently outed pro-ganja center who fouls everyone and will be a free agent in June.

David aint enough and Ike or Shawne is too much. We got no good offer for him. And since he's not good, that's fine.

Seattle will give them Sene or Atlanta Sheldon or something if they want a big.

Anthem
01-26-2008, 09:37 PM
Well...It's not like Harrison for Green is realistic.
Which is what I said in the fourth post of this thread.

Hicks
01-26-2008, 10:00 PM
Just sign him cheap this summer if you want him. Or let someone else be stupid enough to give him more money.

Kstat
01-26-2008, 10:01 PM
I'm not sure which question to ask first: why the pacers would want Gerald Green, or the TWolves would want David Harrison...

Hicks
01-26-2008, 10:17 PM
This is gold:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/050629&num=0
Bill Simmons
ESPN.com



Antoine Wright to the Nets at No. 15, Joey Graham to the Raptors at No. 16. Sorry, I can't concentrate on this draft anymore – the Celtics are one pick away from getting one of the top-six prospects at No. 18 (Green or Granger). This is incredible – it's like we tanked the 2005 season even though we didn't. My Dad and I have officially moved to "Stay on the phone through the Celtics pick with our fingers crossed" mode.

9:13 – Indiana takes Granger, the only guy in this draft other than Paul who could have played in last week's Spurs-Pistons series – now he's going to one of the most talented teams in the league? Yikes. My disappointed father (a Granger fan) immediately brings up the '85 Draft when the Pistons took Joe Dumars one spot ahead of the Celtics. That leads to this exchange:

–Me: "Well, Green went No. 3 in just about every mock draft this week – he's supposedly the closest thing in the draft to Kobe and T-Mac since Kobe and T-Mac."

–Dad (shuffling through his USA Today): "Yeah, the USA Today has him No. 3 … (getting more excited ) … No. 3! (legitimately excited) … Wow! Let's take him!"

That was fast.

9:15 – I'm telling you, Vitale is like Confucius tonight. He just had this rant after the Granger pick: "I get so carried away sometimes hearing all these people talking about quickness, jumping ability, wingspan, hey, this isn't track and field, this is basketball!" Listening to Dickie V tonight makes me feel like Katie Holmes hearing Tom Cruise discuss Scientology for the first time – I feel like he's unlocking a key to a higher being or something. Or, it might just be the blood-red background.

9:17 – And the Celtics take … Gerald Green!

(Woo-hoo! Yippee! Yee-hah! Hey now! Hi-ho!)

According to Andy Katz, the Celtics are absolutely thrilled, adding that Portland, Atlanta and Denver have already called to try to get this pick. Bilas adds, "an insane athlete … great pick at 18." Green tells us that it was "God's plan." On ESPN.com, Chad Ford calls it the "second steal of the draft." Stu Scott tells us that Green was cut by his high school team ("just like a guy named Michael Jordan"). My Dad says, "Trade Pierce! Trade Pierce! Let's build around the kids!" And ESPN tells us that his nickname is G-Money. Just a satisfying three minutes all around. I get to root for Big Al and G-Money for the next 15 years. What could be better than that?

Kofi
01-26-2008, 10:17 PM
I'm not sure which question to ask first: why the pacers would want Gerald Green, or the TWolves would want David Harrison...

Green's a young, athletic guard who can shoot and still has a lot of upside. When your back court consists of Tinsley, Diener, Owens, Rush, Daniels, and a SF in Dunleavy, it can't possibly hurt to take a look at someone like Green. If he doesn't impress management, he can walk at the end of the season, which is what's likely to happen with Harrison anyways. No harm, no foul.


The Wolves big men, outside of Jefferson, are either undersized (Smith, Richard), washed up garbage (Ratliff, Doleac), or both (Madsen). Harrison, at the very least, is a guy with great size, who's a major shot blocker and provides a decent low post threat. He'll also help take some of the beatings off of Jefferson. And he's young, cheap, and a FA at seasons end meaning there's virtually no risk with him (unless he kills someone on the court between now and the end of the season).

It's virtually 0 risk, high reward for both teams. Makes perfect sense to me.

Kstat
01-26-2008, 10:20 PM
Green's a twig that hasn't improved on anything except his ability to dunk in an empty gym. He'll be out of the league in 3 years, which makes him a year better than Harrison.


It's virtually 0 risk, high reward for both teams

Zero risk? For Minnesota? Why would they want that walking headache on their team for any amount of time?

The last thing you need on a last-place team is a guy that is known for nonconstructive attitude.

JayRedd
01-26-2008, 10:25 PM
I like this one better, Hicks.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/071113&sportCat=nba

Bill Simmons
ESPN.com


Reason No. 12,352 why I love the NBA: All the teams that stupidly passed on Danny Granger three summers ago, which was moronic at the time (check out my 2005 draft diary) and seems 10 times dumber now that he's lighting it up under Obie. Anyway, I heard a great story once about Larry Bird discussing a 2005 draft-day trade with another GM in which the Pacers would have traded down from No. 17, but when the Raptors took Joey Graham at No. 16, Bird squealed in delight and screamed, "I gotta go; we're gonna get Danny Granger!" Then he hung up on the guy.

bulldog
01-26-2008, 10:26 PM
The last thing you need on a last-place team is a guy that is known for nonconstructive attitude.

Yep. Harrison's not moveable coming off the drug suspension. His value is less than 0.

JayRedd
01-26-2008, 10:28 PM
Green's a twig that hasn't improved on anything except his ability to dunk in an empty gym. He'll be out of the league in 3 years, which makes him a year better than Harrison.



Zero risk? For Minnesota? Why would they want that walking headache on their team for any amount of time?

The last thing you need on a last-place team is a guy that is known for nonconstructive attitude.

Not to mention they could get someone significantly better than David if they made a few calls.

Kofi
01-26-2008, 10:44 PM
Green's a twig that hasn't improved on anything except his ability to dunk in an empty gym. He'll be out of the league in 3 years.



Zero risk? For Minnesota? Why would they want that walkign headache on their team for any amount of time?

Green's 3-point shooting has improved every season he's been in the league, from 30% his rookie season, 37% last year, and a very impressive 41% this year. His passing is greatly improved, and for the first time in his career he's dishing out more assists than turnovers. Impressive considering he only has 9.2 fingers. He's also looking like a decent rebounder, despite his sleight of frame. He needs to mature, both physically and of course mentally, but the skills are there. Considering how impressive his long range shooting has been, he'd fit right in with the Pacers and Jim O'Brien's system. And being a great dunker is never a bad thing. In fact, Conseco could use some of it to bring a little excitement every now and then.

As for Harrison, sure he has maturity issues, but, all things considered, he's worth the risk for the Wolves. It goes along with the whole "if management isn't impressed, let him walk" scenario. And if he's that bad, he can be cut. I highly doubt it would come to that. And if Minnesota insisted, I'd throw in a future 2nd rounder to offset the risk of Harrison having to be cut.

Kofi
01-26-2008, 10:51 PM
Not to mention they could get someone significantly better than David if they made a few calls.

You're implying Green's some horrid basketball player that deserves to be playing in some 8th rate league in Turkmenistan, yet at the same time you're implying Green has decent trade value? What's the deali-o with that?

Could the Wolves get better than Harrison for Green? Maybe. Significantly better? I doubt it. Like someone else mentioned, if a team wants him (Green) that badly, they can just wait until the offseason and sign him for 1/3 of the MLE ($2M~). It beats giving up something "significantly better than" David Harrison.

Kstat
01-26-2008, 10:57 PM
Green's 3-point shooting has improved every season he's been in the league, from 30% his rookie season, 37% last year, and a very impressive 41% this year.

He's made a whopping 13 threes this season. Nice sample size.

I'd focus more on his %33 field goal shooting, which has gotten worse every season but I guess the fact he makes a three once a week or so overshadows that...


His passing is greatly improved, and for the first time in his career he's dishing out more assists than turnovers.

:laugh: 1.2 assist average, making him 1/5th of an assist better than last year.


And being a great dunker is never a bad thing.

It is when you can only dunk in an empty gym.


He needs to mature, both physically and of course mentally, but the skills are there. Considering how impressive his long range shooting has been, he'd fit right in with the Pacers and Jim O'Brien's system.

One three pointer a week......

Hey, if he improves on that, he might get that average up to 5 or 6 threes in a month, which would equal the amount of 15-footers he makes in a season.


As for Harrison, sure he has maturity issues, but, all things considered, he's worth the risk for the Wolves.

...worth the risk because you say he is? Nobody in the league wants any part of this guy. At least gerald isn't a potential chemistry-killer.

I'd point out the fact that %50 of this forum has a better off-hand than Gerald Green, but that would be piling on...

Ah heck, who am I kidding, I'll mention it anyway. ;)

Kstat
01-26-2008, 10:58 PM
You're implying Green's some horrid basketball player that deserves to be playing in some 8th rate league in Turkmenistan, yet at the same time you're implying Green has decent trade value? What's the deali-o with that?



I think he's implying that pretty much everything else in the NBA is significantly better than David Harrison.

Kofi
01-26-2008, 11:46 PM
He's made a whopping 13 threes this season. Nice sample size.

37% in his career. That's over a sample size of 310 career attempts. Taking that into account, as well as the fact that shooting is something that almost always improves in time, it's only logical to assume the 41% is the norm rather than a statistical anomaly due to a small sample size.

Bottomline - he can hit the long ball. If there's anything that's undebatable about Green's game, it's that.



I'd focus more on his %33 field goal shooting, which has gotten worse every season but I guess the fact he makes a three once a week or so overshadows that...

He's not getting minutes. You can't make shots if you're not playing. Minnesota's giving the majority of their SG/SF minutes to McCants and Brewer. McCants is understandable, he looks very promising. The fact that Brewer's been one of the worst player in the league this year yet is still getting P.T. over Green is the reason Gerald wants out of Minny in the first place, and rightfully so. When you're outplaying someone, and are still riding the bench, you have a right to be frustrated. It has nothing to do with how they're playing and everything to do with Minnesota having plans for Brewer and none for Green, despite the fact that Green has proven to be the more skilled player. That's Kevin McHale for you.

As for his FG%, sure it's bad, but questionable shot selection and the low FG% that comes with it is common amongst young perimeter players. Look no further than the aforementioned Corey Brewer and your very own rookie, Rodney Stuckey (29.7) for example. His career 42% isn't horrible, and he shot a very impressive 48% as a rookie. If you're gonna say his 3% this year is a result of a small sample size, it's only fair that you also use the same logic when taking into account his fg%.


:laugh: 1.2 assist average, making him 1/5th of an assist better than last year.

In half the minutes. That changes things just a little bit, eh? :p


It is when you can only dunk in an empty gym.

I've seen him throw down some nasty in-game dunks last year when he was getting good playing time. In fact, he had one of the best dunks of the season vs the Raptors. You can't throw down in-game dunks if you're not actually getting in the game. :p


...worth the risk because you say he is? Nobody in the league wants any part of this guy. At least gerald isn't a potential chemistry-killer.p

Worth the risk because I say he is? In my opinion, yes.

And you're making extreme exaggerations with the whole "chemistry killer" claim. First of all, no backup is gonna have enough importance on a team to be considered a "chemistry killer". Secondly, he hasn't been a "chemistry killer" here. He's certainly had his rough moments, and isn't exactly Mr. Maturity, but at no point would I say he's been a "chemistry killer". I think this is a blatant exaggeration of the truth in order to help support your opinion.


I'd point out the fact that %50 of this forum has a better off-hand than Gerald Green, but that would be piling on...

Ah heck, who am I kidding, I'll mention it anyway. ;)

It's a flaw, yes. No one said he's some flawless prospect. But it's not a career killer, in fact it's a flaw lots of players have. It can be corrected in time. And even if it's not, he can still be a useful player. We're talking about giving up Harrison and maybe a future 2nd, not a 1st, Granger, or anything of great value.

Kofi
01-26-2008, 11:56 PM
I think he's implying that pretty much everything else in the NBA is significantly better than David Harrison.

I can't agree at all. And you'll see at the end of the season when some team offers Harrison a decent contract. GM's will always take chances with young big men. It's a proven fact. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that Harrison gets a bigger contract this offseason than Green.

JayRedd
01-26-2008, 11:58 PM
You're implying Green's some horrid basketball player that deserves to be playing in some 8th rate league in Turkmenistan, yet at the same time you're implying Green has decent trade value? What's the deali-o with that?

I, though maybe not as much as Kstat, think he's pretty bad at basketball.

Others, such as yourself and certainly some NBA personnel folk, still think his physical tools warrant a deeper look. He's an uber-athlete, after all...even by NBA standards.

But I watch a lot of Celtics ball and have never seen much. Just don't think he's good.


Could the Wolves get better than Harrison for Green? Maybe. Significantly better? I doubt it. Like someone else mentioned, if a team wants him (Green) that badly, they can just wait until the offseason and sign him for 1/3 of the MLE ($2M~). It beats giving up something "significantly better than" David Harrison.

Significantly better isn't that hard. Harrison has no value, like Bulldog said.

Dallas could give up Fakezas. Phoenix could offer Alando Tucker. Seattle has multiple big man "projects" they could offer. Hornets have Hitlon Armstrong. Houston has Steve Novak. Hell, Portland might give up Sergio Rodriguez.

I'm not saying any of these guys are great. But plenty of teams could and would offer players at least this good and most likely better for a guy with this much potential...even if his deal is set to expire this summer (which I find hard to believe by the way. Did they really not pick up his option? Why?)

But personally, I think he's gonna be dogshi*. So I wouldn't offer anything but dogshi*. And if we called up Minnesota with an offer of Harrison, that's exactly what McHale would think we were offering and hang-up.

jeffg-body
01-27-2008, 12:08 AM
I think it would be a good move if they are willing to go for Harrison. It's not like Harrison will probably be returning next season. If we can pull that off it could be a second coup like signing Rush.:darkness::dj::king::borg::lurk:

Naptown_Seth
01-27-2008, 12:49 AM
Would Minny, though?

I think we'd all agree that we'd move Harrison for loose change if we could, despite the fact that the one thing this team doesn't need is another raw swingman.
They might if they don't get better offers. You have zero interest in Green and will let him walk this summer, Harrison can also be let go this summer, so WTF does it hurt to swap them for either team?

But again that means that no one thinks enough of Green to give Minny a better offer. And if that's the case then we can't count on much ourselves.

edit - all of this has already been said in much more detail by others which makes this post more of a QFT ;)

CableKC
01-27-2008, 01:14 AM
I'm not sure which question to ask first: why the pacers would want Gerald Green, or the TWolves would want David Harrison...
The first post in this thread that makes sense. Let's see.....we are so chalk-full of SG/SF that one of the reasons ( but not the main reason ) why we are now playing Small Ball is cuz most of our halfway decent shooter/scorers happen to be SG/SFs. It totally makes sense to me to add yet another SG/SF to our rotation that we are going to have ZERO minutes to play that will likely bolt after this offseason.

If we were a team that was stacked in the Frontcourt and were in need of a Guard, then I could see making a run for Green as a sensible plan. But since we are not.....I don't see Green as an option.

Kofi
01-27-2008, 01:44 AM
The first post in this thread that makes sense. Let's see.....we are so chalk-full of SG/SF that one of the reasons ( but not the main reason ) why we are now playing Small Ball is cuz most of our halfway decent shooter/scorers happen to be SG/SFs. It totally makes sense to me to add yet another SG/SF to our rotation that we are going to have ZERO minutes to play that will likely bolt after this offseason.

If we were a team that was stacked in the Frontcourt and were in need of a Guard, then I could see making a run for Green as a sensible plan. But since we are not.....I don't see Green as an option.

I will respectfully disagree. We have backcourt quantity but I do not believe we have backcourt quality. What you see is what you get with Rush, Daniels, and Owens - serviceable players, but nothing more. Daniels can't shoot and is injury prone. Owens is a 6'3" SG. Rush has been the best of the three, but even he's nothing special and will likely bolt for greener pa$ture$ at seasons end. Gerald is serviceable right now (despite what some people would like to believe), yet he also has the physical tools and untapped potential to be much more than that in the future. He's a very comparable prospect to Shawne Williams in my opinion, the difference being Green is more of a SG to Shawne's SF. If he can be had, we'd be fools to pass him up. Just because he hasn't lived up to the pre-draft hype of being the next Tracy McGrady doesn't mean he's not still a good prospect.

CableKC
01-27-2008, 03:23 AM
Owens is a 6'3" SG.
Although you think that Owens is a 6'4" ( according to his NBA profile ;) ) SG ( which is pretty much true ), he doesn't play minutes at the SG/SF rotation....he only backs up Diener or Tinsley. He wouldn't eat up any minutes at any position that Green would likely play.


Rush has been the best of the three, but even he's nothing special and will likely bolt for greener pa$ture$ at seasons end.
Green is a Unresticted Free Agent as well.....why wouldn't Green do the same?


Gerald is serviceable right now (despite what some people would like to believe), yet he also has the physical tools and untapped potential to be much more than that in the future. He's a very comparable prospect to Shawne Williams in my opinion, the difference being Green is more of a SG to Shawne's SF. If he can be had, we'd be fools to pass him up. Just because he hasn't lived up to the pre-draft hype of being the next Tracy McGrady doesn't mean he's not still a good prospect.
I didn't say that he wasn't a good prospect....I just said that we have ZERO minutes for him in our rotation now.

I don't see him playing ahead of Granger, Dunleavy or Rush. That means that at best...he can probably get the share the remaining minutes of the SG/SF/PF rotation with Marquis and Shawne. We barely have enough minutes for them now.....where are we going to get minutes to add Green? Unless we trade Marquis or Shawne ( something that I doubt will happen ), the Pacers FO really thinks that Green is something special and is worth giving him a "trial run"....then I just don't that we can get him any meaningful minutes.

And if we aren't able to give him any meaningful minutes now.......how are we going to play him to see if he's worth signing in the offseason?

If he was a Restricted FA...then I can see taking a risk on him....but since he's an Unresticted FA, then I don't see the point of trying him out.

Bball
01-29-2008, 07:32 AM
I'm reading Kstat's scouting report on Green and trying to decide how much weight to give it.... as I remember Kstat's glowing and gushing scouting report on Darko when he learned he would be a Piston....

;)

I heard everyone's favorite commentator, Tommy Heinson, talking about Green just the other day. He said (paraphrased) that Green's dunking performance had caused him to forget that there were other parts to the offense than dunks and it doomed him in Boston. Tommy was surprised to see that he'd developed a midrange game since leaving the Celtics.

FWIW...


-Bball

Major Cold
01-29-2008, 12:48 PM
they should take a shot at this.