# Does Draymond Green deserve a max deal?



## Basel

> During Golden State’s game against the Cleveland Cavaliers on Jan. 9, analyst Jeff Van Gundy made a bold prediction about Draymond Green on the broadcast: “I really think he's going to be a max player.”
> 
> Twitter did a double take over a valuation that few, if any, had offered publicly. Van Gundy had a solid case, though, even if it went against conventional wisdom: "How many guys defend, rebound, pass and make 3s? That combination, you just don't see."
> 
> While you just don’t see Green’s combination of skills, you also just don’t see guys averaging fewer than 12 points getting max restricted offers -- unless they’re 7 feet tall. If Van Gundy’s right, if this does indeed happen, it would have to mark a sea change in the business of basketball.
> 
> We’re talking about a second-round pick who’s shorter than 6-6 in socks, who doesn't jump high, create his own shot or dominate the ball. A rookie max deal for a scrappy “tweener” averaging the fourth-most points per game on his team? Basketball doesn’t work that way -- yet. This summer will be a good test of whether teams pay big for a guy who does all the “little things.”
> 
> Green might not boast gaudy traditional stats, but one stat in particular loudly agrees with Van Gundy's assertion. Real plus-minus, which measures a player by how his team does when he’s in the game, lists Green as the 10th-best player in the league. He’s first among wings, ahead of even LeBron James. Of course, Green isn't technically a wing this season; he’s starting at power forward. But that ambiguity of position reflects the value he brings. Against the Mavericks, he ably guarded Dirk Nowitzki and Monta Ellis in the same game. It’s difficult to fit a player like this into a box.
> 
> Perhaps you assume his RPM is a fluke, some bizarre byproduct of an excellent Warriors run. That would make sense except Green was third among wings in real plus-minus last season, when he played much of the season among an anemic bench lineup. Green also produced a positive RPM as a rookie despite shooting a horrific 32.7 percent from the field.
> 
> “Draymond Green is the poster boy for the defensive superstar who is making contributions that are on par with offensive superstars that we easily recognize,” said Steve Ilardi, one of the architects of RPM.
> 
> Green’s ability to guard five positions has been praised, but the underpaid are often paid in compliments like “heart,” “grit” and “hustle.” The idea behind using a team success stat is to make Green’s production register in the way, “25 points per game” resonates. That kind of resonance might elevate an athlete’s status from “gritty” to “superstar.” When I asked if the Warriors should match a rookie max offer, Ilardi answered: “Yes.”


http://espn.go.com/blog/golden-state-warriors/post/_/id/252/does-draymond-green-deserve-a-max-deal


----------



## e-monk

no but with the cap bounce coming a max now will look decent in 3 seasons so who knows?


----------



## Diable

It depends on who gives it to him really. He'd be worth it to GSW. David Lee's contract has to go, if you figure out how to dump him you're golden.

Some team like the Knicks or the Lakers gives him a Max deal without a bunch of other good players on the team, that's a disaster in the making.


----------



## Mrs. Thang

Green is a great basketball player. I don't think he is going to get a max deal, but it will be close. I don't think Golden State can keep him for less than $10-12 million per year.


----------



## R-Star

Diable said:


> It depends on who gives it to him really. He'd be worth it to GSW. David Lee's contract has to go, if you figure out how to dump him you're golden.
> 
> Some team like the Knicks or the Lakers gives him a Max deal without a bunch of other good players on the team, that's a disaster in the making.


Klay Thompson gets a 12 mil a year bump next year. Bogut, Iggy and Curry are all making around 11.5. Even if you somehow dump Lee, which is next to impossible until next season, it's still ridiculous to max out Green. 

He's a super role player. A glue guy. You don't max those guys out unless they manage to get 20ppg like Artest did in his prime. 

10 mil a year is fair for Green.


----------



## RollWithEm

Last year, Goran Dragic looked like a max guy. This year, no one would give him that much. I always worry about one-year-wonder type guys. If I'm the Warriors, I would want to see this experiment with him at the 4 work at least throughout the playoffs before I would make this kind of decision.


----------



## Bogg

If I'm the Celtics, I probably offer to eat the final year of David Lee's contract if Golden State tosses in Harrison Barnes, and the C's have three draft picks in the 20-35 range in order to use one or more as a sweetener to get the Warriors some cheap bench help, although I'm not sure if Golden State does it. I may even throw a biggish offer sheet at Green at the same time to force their hand. That being said, Golden State's billionaire owner should probably just suck it up and pay a year of luxury tax in order to keep his contender together. You can always stretch-provision Lee for free if you need to, and that chops $10 million off next year's payroll by itself. 

In response to the original question though: no, they shouldn't max out Draymond Green. He's a really good role player in the perfect situation. $17-18 million a year for that is absurd.


----------



## Basel

R-Star said:


> Klay Thompson gets a 12 mil a year bump next year. Bogut, Iggy and Curry are all making around 11.5. Even if you somehow dump Lee, which is next to impossible until next season, it's still ridiculous to max out Barnes.
> 
> 
> 
> He's a super role player. A glue guy. You don't max those guys out unless they manage to get 20ppg like Artest did in his prime.
> 
> 
> 
> 10 mil a year is fair for Barnes.



You said Barnes twice. Surely you meant Green.


----------



## seifer0406

I mentioned this on the Raptors board a while back, I think the Raptors might be willing to eat Lee's contract is all the Raptors have to give up is to match salaries. The Raptors are one of the few playoff teams that are in dire need of front court help and have enough expiring contracts to make the trade work.


----------



## R-Star

Basel said:


> You said Barnes twice. Surely you meant Green.


We aren't talking about Matt Barnes?


----------



## Diable

Pretty sure that a max deal for Green would start out at around 14 million next year. There's not a ton of difference between what people are saying he deserves and a max deal, not under the current cba.


----------



## Mrs. Thang

Keep in mind the max for a player with Green's service time is only around $14 million (not $18). With the cap set to jump substantially with the new TV deal in 2017, that number will probably come in at less than 20% of the total cap. Not at all prohibitive. Smart teams are going to realize that they can inflate their way out of the back end of these deals and a lot of guys are going to get max contracts this summer.


----------



## Mrs. Thang

I will say if Greg Monroe leaves Detroit I think they throw the max at Green. I think teams with coach/GM combos will be able to look past the scoring more easily and he'd be an easy sell to the fans as a beloved local player.


----------



## R-Star

Mrs. Thang said:


> Keep in mind the max for a player with Green's service time is only around $14 million (not $18). With the cap set to jump substantially with the new TV deal in 2017, that number will probably come in at less than 20% of the total cap. Not at all prohibitive. Smart teams are going to realize that they can inflate their way out of the back end of these deals and a lot of guys are going to get max contracts this summer.


So you're advocating for him to get Paul George money?


----------



## bball2223

Mrs. Thang said:


> I will say if Greg Monroe leaves Detroit I think they throw the max at Green. I think teams with coach/GM combos will be able to look past the scoring more easily and he'd be an easy sell to the fans as a beloved local player.


I would love him in Detroit, but not for the max. It would probably take the max to come back home and play however.


----------



## R-Star

bball2223 said:


> I would love him in Detroit, but not for the max. It would probably take the max to come back home and play however.


I'd rather Monroe if I'm Detroit to be honest. He and Drummond dominate the boards, and his offense is nice to have when Drummond has to sit when people start sending him to the line. You put Green there in his place and I don't think you have enough scoring punch.

Would be a good defensive pairing though.


----------



## Mrs. Thang

R-Star said:


> So you're advocating for him to get Paul George money?


No, Paul George got the 5 year/30% super-max. Green is potentially looking at the 4 year/25%. I think his true value is below that, but not so far that he has no chance of reaching it on an over-pay deal to get GS not to match.


----------



## R-Star

Mrs. Thang said:


> No, Paul George got the 5 year/30% super-max. Green is potentially looking at the 4 year/25%. I think his true value is below that, but not so far that he has no chance of reaching it on an over-pay deal to get GS not to match.


That would put Curry as the teams 6th highest paid player. Even if you get rid of Lee it doesn't seem all that feasible to bump Klay by 12 next year and Green by roughly 9 or so. 

I agree it would be best to keep Green, but this is reminding me of when Austin Croshere played amazing and the Pacers made the Finals. Didn't look all that great when everyone woke up to reality the next season.


----------



## Mrs. Thang

Another important point because the NBA salary system has gotten so complicated: I don't think any of these guys guys (Green, Butler, Monroe, Leonard, etc) are going to get actual "max" contracts in the sense that contracts designated "max" scale automatically with the salary cap. They would be like Klay Thompson's deal where it's a contract for the same amount of money that a max would be based on this year's cap, but isn't officially a 'max' in that they don't automatically get 20% of whatever the cap happens to be after the new TV deal.

For Green, I should also say I don't expect him on GS next year because I don't think they can afford him. I probably have a lot less concern about paying him for a career year than most but I'm biased because I've been a huge believer for a long time and like feeling vindicated (I still can't believe freaking Royce White was a lottery pick and Green went in the second round even though he was the best player in the country not named Anthony Davis).


----------



## turkeysub

Draymond Green is a really nice player and a huge part of the Warrior's success, but we all can tell he's not a max player. He simply doesn't score enough to command that much money.


----------



## bball2223

R-Star said:


> I'd rather Monroe if I'm Detroit to be honest. He and Drummond dominate the boards, and his offense is nice to have when Drummond has to sit when people start sending him to the line. You put Green there in his place and I don't think you have enough scoring punch.
> 
> *Would be a good defensive pairing though.*


Exactly what I was thinking. I would be content with either, but our best teams in franchise history have been defensive minded. Monroe is probably the better fit until we find a consistent scorer on the wings.


----------

