You can't compare averages between a full time back and a change of pace back. The change of pace back always have a higher average.
Greene ran really well for two games in the playoffs. I don't know how that showed anyone who the better back really was. Cincy had several defensive starters at less than 100%.
Thomas Jones was heads and shoulders the best RB on that team last year. Greene has the potential to be that good, but he has yet to show that he can be an every down back for a 16 game season and that the first two. We don't even know if Greene is going to be a good lead back in this league and now we are saying he is better than what was the third best RB last year. You are talking two games. Against Indy, he only had 41 yards.
I will say that Greene is younger and probably wouldn't tire out at the end of the season if he proves he is durable and consistent, but Jones was far better over the entire course of the season. One or two game does not mean anything especially if the other teams gameplanned to stop Jones and not Greene. The fact they they were trying to stop one running style and got a heavy dose of another can affect a defense.
I mean based one or two games, the Pats made mistakes not making guys like Mike Cloud or BenJarvus Green Ellis their lead back. Ah, remember all the BJGE talk this preseason because he was a beast in the 2008 season for one game?
I see a lot of facts about Greene's POTENTIAL, but I see absolutely no facts that states that he is guaranteed to be a 1400 yard, 12 plus TD RB in this league like Jones was last year. Greene was clearly the better RB in the playoffs, but I don't think you can argue he is definitely a better RB than what Jones was for the regular season.