I’m not worried about this yet. Green says he’s “all good.” He’s okay enough to participate in portions of the practice. But at what point do these odd medical issues turn troublesome? If he was really “all good,” he’d be participating fully in practice. And I don’t believe for a second that Green declined to ask what was wrong with him, as he claimed earlier today. If doctors told me I wasn’t healthy enough to play basketball, I know the very first thing I would ask is, “What’s going on, doc?” So what’s the deal? What in the world is going on here?

P.S. — I know Green signed a $9 million contract. But when you add luxury tax, that makes it $18 million.

During Jeff Green’s half season in Boston, I was often his biggest detractor. But now that Green is signed, I’m unequivocally happy.

My smile has nothing to do with my blind love for the Celtics, nor does it have anything to do with changing my opinion on Green. I still have serious questions about whether Green can be a building block for the future, in Boston or anywhere else. But on a one-year deal that maintains cap flexibility for Boston in the summer of 2012, keeping Green was the best move Boston could make.

The Celtics will spend $18 million on a backup small forward for one season, Green’s $9 million contract plus the dollar-for-dollar luxury tax the team will have to spend for being significantly over the cap. That’s an insane amount of money for a player who made both of his teams worse last season, but the Celtics did their job — by overpaying Green for one season, the C’s convinced him to sign a one-year deal, rather than a multi-year deal, which keeps their cap space open and gives the Celtics an opportunity to gauge Green’s long-term value more accurately during a one-year tryout of sorts. Boston fans should line up to kiss Wyc Grousbeck’s feet. After a lockout during which NBA owners complained about all the money they were losing, Grousbeck was willing to pay “Kevin Garnett in his prime” money for Jeff Green so the Celtics could hold onto their big-picture vision of limiting salary going into the 2012 free agency period.

Green isn’t a perfect player — people who read the site know I complain about his rebounding, defensive rotations and general laissez-faire attitude — which is why the Celtics aren’t sure he’s the long-term answer, but he’s also better than anybody the Celtics could have acquired using the mini mid-level exception. Richard Hamilton is rumored to have signed a two-year, $10-million deal in Chicago. Marcus Thornton will earn about $8 million per season. The Celtics, if they had not signed Green, would have been looking to add a small forward using a $3 million exception or the veteran’s minimum. At that price, they would have been lucky if the player could tie his shoes without tripping over himself.

Again, Green comes equipped with flaws that have hindered his efficiency and generally caused his teams to play worse when he’s on the court. But he’s a talented, versatile player who still has enough youth that he could theoretically put those flaws in his rearview mirror at some point in the near future. More likely, he will continue to be an average player, someone whose talent tantalizes but production doesn’t always do the same. Either way, on a one-year contract that commits nothing to the future, the Celtics have somehow walked the Jeff Green tightrope and survived, retaining his services and solidifying the bench without committing any cash beyond this season.

Danny Ainge has done a masterful job rebuilding Boston’s bench with limited assets. The C’s decision to overpay Green for one year shows they are not convinced he will be part of their future, but in the present, keeping him on the roster was the best option.

Danny Ainge said during a press conference Thursday that the Boston Celtics want to re-sign Jeff Green.

“We’d like to have Jeff [Green] back, yes,” Ainge said.

If you read the site, you know my feelings about Jeff Green are confused and often harsh, but based in fact. He has the potential to develop into something better, something versatile and effective and impressive, but his production has never lived up to his skill set, and his lack of efficiency on both ends has routinely hurt his teams. That’s not me being biased. That’s fact.

You also know I think the decision Boston will make on Jeff Green this offseason could help shape the team for years to come. Does he deserve long-term money, which he almost assuredly will receive from some team willing to take a risk on a young, athletic hybrid forward? How much can the Celtics afford to pay him? At what point is re-signing him no longer worth it? The Celtics, as Doc Rivers told Scott Souza yesterday, are balancing the present with the future. Deciding what to do with Green is a crucial part of that.

Just tread carefully, Danny. Please.

I don’t always take trade rumors at face value. But if you take the latest “Danny Ainge wanted to swap Rajon Rondo and Jeff Green for Kendrick Perkins and Russell Westbrook after the 2011 playoffs” rumor as the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help me God, faith could be shaken and beliefs could be altered. (ESPN)

ESPN’s Chris Broussard dug up yet another interesting Celtics tidbit for us this evening, one that casts last season’s Kendrick Perkins-for-Jeff Green trade in an entirely new light.

After last season’s playoffs, the Celtics offered Rajon Rondo and Green to Oklahoma City for Russell Westbrook and Perkins, sources told Broussard. The Celtics, looking for another scorer who can create his own offense, thought Westbrook might be available after his erratic postseason play. But Oklahoma was not interested in the deal.

Let’s assume this rumor is true and take a look at the timeline:

1) The Celtics are favorites in the East, if not the entire NBA, and destroying everyone on the schedule.

2) Danny Ainge, at the last minute before the trade deadline, swaps Kendrick Perkins and Nate Robinson for Nenad Krstic and Jeff Green. We later hear the trade was made for financial reasons — the C’s did not believe they could afford to re-sign Perkins after the season.

3) The Celtics fall apart after acquiring Green. Green, despite all his obvious natural athleticism, fails to produce in any one aspect of the game. He does not score, rebound, or defend particularly well, and the Celtics collapse during the second half of the season, ultimately bowing to the Miami Heat in five games.

4) Fuck being frugal. Ainge offers to reacquire Perkins (and his new, $9 million per season contract), except this time he also proposes to (slightly) downgrade from Rajon Rondo to Russell Westbrook.

5) Sam Presti hangs up the phone, chuckling to himself.

6) A few months later, the trade offer resurfaces. My period of grieving goes something like this: I spend three hours crying about Perk (“I just miss his scowl, mom”), two hours trying to Google Ainge’s address so I can egg his house, two more hours trying to ponder the question: “wait, Rondo IS better than Westbrook, right?”, and then I return to crying about Perk until I fall asleep.

Unfortunately for Ainge, there is no reset button in real life.

Jeff Green is a piece of IKEA furniture. You acquire him, take his contents out of the box and rest them on the floor. The pieces are all there. But (at least if you’re like I am) it’s a long process to assemble them into a finished product. While you stare blankly at the pieces spread on the floor, you wonder if they’ll ever fit together the way they’re supposed to.

Green (quite literally) swears he can play. But he only needs to say so with such emphasis because a legion of doubters exist who wonder if Green’s skills will ever mesh, who wonder whether Green will one day make the transition from “the J.D. Drew of basketball” into something better, a transition we suspect he might be capable of making although we aren’t entirely sure.

Considering Green is now 25 years old, four full years into his career, at a stage when many players are entering their primes, it’s easy to look at Green’s tools and wonder if they’ll ever fit together the way they’re supposed to. (Boston Herald)

“Yeah, man, you know a lot of people don’t know what I can really do,” he said. “In Oklahoma, I was kind of overshadowed by Kevin (Durant) and the way Russell (Westbrook) picked up, but, excuse my language, I can really (expletive) play. I can really play this game, man.”

That belief was supported by discussions he had following the season.

“I had some good meetings with (coach) Doc (Rivers) before the lockout, and I’ve been talking to P (Paul Pierce) and Ray (Allen),” Green said. “Next year they’re really going to allow me to play, and I think that’s what I need. I need to go out there and just play. Sometimes I think too much, but I just need to go out there and play the game. I’ve got great confidence in myself, but things were a little difficult last year.”

I listened to the new Childish Gambino CD today while driving my car. I’m not in love with the CD. It’s pretty good. But during one song, Gambino stops rapping and begins to tell a story instead. What he talks about doesn’t really matter. It has something to do with a 13-year old, his crush, and a broken heart. But the conclusion to the story was thought-provoking.

Gambino said the story “isn’t about how girls are evil or love is bad. This is a story about how I learned something. And I’m not saying this thing is true or not. I’m just saying it’s what I learned.”

Here’s what I’ve learned about Jeff Green:

• He’s talented, but not preternaturally so. He can run. He can jump. He’s reasonably strong. He’s not a bad outside shooter. He’s a solid passer, can play two or three positions (with various results) and handles the ball decently for someone who stands 6-9. But he has no specialty on the court. Not everyone has a specialty. Scottie Pippen did pretty well for himself as a jack-of-all-trades. But specialties help. Ask Bruce Bowen, to whom professional basketball meant nothing more than playing rugged defense and shooting corner threes.
• In Oklahoma City, Green posted solid traditional numbers. 16.5 points and 6.7 rebounds one season. 15.2 points and 5.6 points last year before the trade.
• Those numbers were hollow. Green’s production was boosted by the fact that he played major minutes. But his impressive traditional statistics were achieved without much efficiency, and sometimes to his team’s detriment.
• The Celtics were 11.7 points per 48 minutes better without Green on the floor. There is no more damning statistic than that.
• Green plays with a vacant look in his eyes. I’m not sure this means anything about his competitiveness. It might, but it probably doesn’t. Remember, Tim Duncan is similarly subdued. The boring San Antonio Spur would probably flip you the bird for suggesting that he doesn’t show enough emotion, but his fingers are too weighted down by rings.
• There’s a train of thought, led partially by Green, that Green didn’t adjust well to playing alongside Boston’s many Hall of Famers. But Green’s production was actually very similar in Oklahoma City and Boston. He just didn’t play as many minutes. Check his PER (admittedly not a perfect measurement of production, but one of the better measures we have): 12.91 in Oklahoma City last season, 12.92 in Boston. Green’s rebounding rate, true shooting percentage and usage rate also remained almost unchanged after the trade.
• There are reasons why Jeff Green intrigues people. He’s versatile. He’s skilled. He seems like a good person to have in the locker room. We suspect he is capable of better play, even while we’re cursing him out for missing a box out, questioning Danny Ainge for making the trade or fretting about how much money Ainge might throw at Green when (and if) free agency finally comes.

This is a story about how I learned some things. And I’m not saying these things are true or not. There’s a chance Green re-signs with the Celtics, adjusts to life in Boston, and becomes an All-Star. I acknowledge that possibility. I’m just saying this is what I’ve learned.

Jeff Green does not give a damn about the NBA lockout and he does not care what’s in the latest proposal, according to a Washington Examiner report from 8:05 Sunday night. But approximately 13 hours after that story published, Green arrived at the meeting for player reps today in New York City, presumably to educate himself on the new deal. So much for that theory about his indifference.

From the Washington Examiner Sunday night:

Green said he hadn’t seen the “last, best” offer handed to the players union by NBA commissioner David Stern last week. He didn’t have any idea whether it would be rejected or approved. In fact, Green appeared indifferent to the entire process — no help to the public perception that players are to blame for the lockout in the first place, even if it isn’t true.

“I just want to play,” Green said, having left the details in the hands of his agent, David Falk, who was quoted on the same day in The New York Times advocating a full player vote on the deal.

Green wasn’t advocating anything at all. If the NBA season is lost altogether, at least he won’t have to change his stance.

At least that report made sense for all of 13 hours, though.

Green responds to an alley oop dunk the same way he responds to a missed box out, which is the same way he responds to winning a playoff game, which is likely the same way he would respond if the Easter bunny knocked on his door to offer him unlimited candy, forever. That is to say, he doesn’t respond, at least on the exterior. So the report seemed like it could be true. Only it wasn’t, at all.

Green cares about the NBA lockout, at least enough to visit NYC and educate himself on the latest proposal. And he should. His future is in the balance.

Of course, he probably should have educated himself months ago. But I’ll save that argument for another day.