I think there are some differences, but regardless within the context of this article the author states:

"it wasn’t an excess of greed ..., but rather an excess of overcaution"

I disagree with this statement, and clearly, based on your definition here, this can't be true either. Unless, saying "is wasn't greed it was greed" actually makes sense. Obviously I don't think you believe that, I'm just pointing out a major issue with the article as a whole.