Drafting T. Green

by rmcdougall on Apr 11, 2008 10:50 AM PDT

If Green was in this draft, wouldn't we draft him again?

He was the highest scorer and leader of the National Championship team, as well as being known for his defense. He plays the position we're most interested in, PG. He was an above average passer.

But mostly, he played good defense, was a winner, and had decent potential.

This is practically the only move by KP I don't understand. Am I totally off-base, or would we draft Green at the #13 this year if he was available?

Poll

Taurean Green what we want?

Yes

15 votes

No

76 votes

91 votes | Poll has closed

0 recs | Comment 20 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

maybe

There's a good chance we'd draft him again- in the 2nd round.

Green does not have "decent potential." He has 3rd string PG potential- or 2nd string for a mediocre team.

He's undersized, isn't a great shooter from NBA 3 pt range (great from the college line), isn't very quick, etc.

He did a great job at Florida and he knows how to play, but he just isn't a rotation player for an NBA playoff team.

by jksnake99 on Apr 11, 2008 11:05 AM PDT 0 recs

what he said

by OregonDuckworth on Apr 11, 2008 11:07 AM PDT up 0 recs

Didn't

Nate say he was the best shooter on the team?

by jamon51 on Apr 11, 2008 2:40 PM PDT up 0 recs

Taurean is 2-11 on threes this year and shooting 28% from the field overall. That's obviously too small a sample size to judge him on, but it always seemed to me that the NBA 3 was a little bit out of his comfort zone.

by jksnake99 on Apr 11, 2008 3:00 PM PDT up 0 recs

not team, but guards i guess

Here it is...

Right now, I would say he is the best three-point shooter among the guards.

by jamon51 on Apr 11, 2008 7:08 PM PDT up 0 recs

It's not easy being green

One additional year of college probably wouldn't have helped. Green was regarded as a marginal prospect going into the draft, which is why we were able to snag him in the late second round. Minus Noah, Big Al, and Corey Brewer--Green wasn't going to get Florida to the Final Four (or anywhere close) all by himself; and opposing defenses would have been able to shut him down.

The fact he was on a two-time champion probably helped his stock immensely.

The chief problem with Green is that his quotient of strength, size, speed, skills, sweat, and smarts is not NBA-caliber. He's a good worker, and he's intelligent--but he's a lot slower than most guys his size, and his offensive game is rather limited. He's got a reputation as a decent defender, but didn't seem able to get off the bench in Portland despite the Blazers having numerous PGs who are generally regarded as poor (Sergio) to average (Blake) defenders. Lots of guys who are good defenders in college simply are unable to stop the faster and stronger athletes they face in the NBA.

This year's draft is deep in PGs--with guys like Rose, Bayless, Augustin, Collison, and Westbrook around. All of these have far more potential than Green.

Green's maximum potential is probably that of another NCAA-winning point guard--Steve Blake. But no higher; and we've already got one Blake and don't need another.

by EngineerScotty on Apr 11, 2008 11:07 AM PDT 0 recs

College Point Guards

College has a longer clock. Years of playing PG in college can lead to a slow it down and not make mistakes mentality. I saw this in Damon. He would eat up clock and then have to either drive (and miss) or shoot the 3. I see this in Green. Green needs to re-learn clock to play NBA hoops. Being undersized adds to the problem, because you end up doing alot of dribbling through the trees to find the right opening.

There is all this talk of needing a PG. With AllWorld BRoy playing 40 minutes, that is not much of an issue. I guess it would be nice to have against certain teams. Maybe it gets more important when Oden and Rudy come in next year. But I think our players are getting good at sharing and distributing.

So what's the real need here? What exactly does a committed 1 get us?

'77

by LaoTzu on Apr 11, 2008 11:33 AM PDT 0 recs

Damon

lol. Dribble till the clock is at ten seconds then try to do something.

Your ad here.

by JTDuck22 on Apr 11, 2008 2:41 PM PDT up 0 recs

Winners

If you look at the NBA, there is one team that is filled to the brim with college winner.... The underachieving Bobcats. Felton, Sean May, Emeka Okafor, Jason Richardson, and Nazr Mohammed all National Champions. Adam Morrison and Jared Dudley weren't bad either. Because of this I see little importance to being a national champion in college, hence, no, I wouldn't draft Green again.

Joel Freeland=Stud

by hightide on Apr 11, 2008 12:30 PM PDT 0 recs

T. Green missed

being an excellant NBA point guard by an inch. Well... more like 3 or 4 inches. As noted above his combination of speed and height simply don't add up to a first round draft or a starter on a winning NBA team. I like the guy but I think he's simply overmatched.

by jon on Apr 11, 2008 12:40 PM PDT 0 recs

Nyet.

by bfan on Apr 11, 2008 1:19 PM PDT 0 recs

HET, DA, HET

I'm super duper awesome

by hobobob on Apr 11, 2008 1:35 PM PDT up 0 recs

More than anything

I think the thought process is that Green would never be more than 4th string in 2 years. I think Koppenhagenen or whoever the Finish Playboy guy is...he is in the plans. Between Blake, Sergio, Jack, K-dog, and maybe another PG added to the mix this upcoming year, I don't see where Green fits.

I think Jack is gone this summer, if not half way through next season. Blake will stay. Sergio will stay. If Jack is gone, and we don't add another point guard, I would expect Petteri to be brought over.

This doesn't even address the idea of Roy being a point...although that remains to be seen.

If Von Wafer was converted into a point guard...We would win the Championship 10 years straight. Of course that won't happen, so we'll all be left to wonder, "What if...."

I'm hip, I'm slick, and all the women want my phone number!

by silkybrown on Apr 11, 2008 1:45 PM PDT 0 recs

The finland kid

he's like billy the kid, but with a basketball... and he doesn't kill people... or have a horse.

Or does he?

I don't think he has a horse.

Team OK just has to say that we'll take the lead with no delay. We have the players to keep the pace and in the end we'll win the race.

by ratbastird on Apr 11, 2008 4:20 PM PDT up 0 recs

He is and will forever be....

the Honka Playboy. Please people: with all the struggles we've had with a nickname for LaMarcus, Roy (BRoy? RoyBoy? eeck), the two JJ's, Webster (Webby? Marty? again, blah), and God-Help-Us Spanish Chocolate, can't we accept a player with a ready-made, NBA-caliber nickname. Like Channing's delightful blogging, love of flyfishing, and all the other items on the buffet (though the rebounding chafing dish could use a re-fill), it is sufficient reason to stick by Kid Finland, the Honka Playboy. I gnash my teeth that I did not get that user name.

by PDXiled in DC on Apr 13, 2008 9:33 AM PDT up 0 recs

I called him the finland kid when drafted

and I shall stick by that name.

if you want to pine for the hunka playboy that is the finland kid, you are more than welcome to.

Until i learn to spell his name, he's the finland kid in my book.

I have been known to be wrong, but you won't get rich off THOSE nickels.

by ratbastird on Apr 14, 2008 1:43 PM PDT up 0 recs

Easy

If Green is worth the 13 pick in the draft, then we either would not have traded him, or Von Wafer is worth the 13th pick in the draft.

What is love? Baby don't hurt me. Don't hurt me. No more.

by tominhawaii on Apr 11, 2008 3:16 PM PDT 0 recs

good point by lao tzu

about the difference between ncaa and nba shot-clocks. you really have some time in college to dribble around and collect your thoughts and survey the defense in a way you just can't do as a pro.

ignacio

by ignacio on Apr 11, 2008 5:51 PM PDT 0 recs

Good points

Obviously, if Green was all that good, he'd still be a Blazer. Just interesting to see how he fits a lot of the descriptions we're throwing around for what we need from a point guard. I think the problem is that he fits them all, but doesn't excel at them.

by rmcdougall on Apr 11, 2008 6:36 PM PDT 0 recs

Yes.

I think the primary reason everyone jumped on Green's bandwagon early this season is because of Nate's surprising, weird, unfounded, left field, bizarre comment he made about how good he thought Green was and how he predicted he would be responsible for 4 or 5 wins during the season. I wasn't the only one who was thinking: WHAT?!!

I was mystified by his statement then and remain so today (and was surprised so many people bought into it). I've thought for some time that Nate brings a lot of qualities to the coaching game but talent evaluation is not among them. He's displayed this weakness multiple times. Thankfully we have KP's group to compensate for Nate's shortcomings in this area.

by TwoDeep on Apr 11, 2008 7:24 PM PDT 0 recs