I've been looking for a player forced turnover stat but can't find it. I think that all of his intangibles boil down to that one metric: giving his team extra possessions through crazy hustle.
I know the biggest knock on him is his scoring efficiency. It's seriously overblown for what role he is on our team.
3 pointers:
Smart shot 30% from 3 last season on 4.6 attempts per game for 4.14 points per game . Let's say you bump that up to what Klay Thompson shot from 3: 44%. That means he would be making 2.024 3's per game for 6.072 points for a difference of 1.932 points per game.
2 pointers:
Smart shot 42.9% from 2s on 4.9 attempts per game for 4.2042 points. Let's say you bump that up to what Thompson shot from 2 point shooting: 52.6%. That means he would be making 2.5774 2's per game for 5.1548 points for a difference of 0.9506.
Add those up for 2.8826 points (let's call it 3) as the difference lost per game between Smart and Klay Thompson on Thompson's efficiency & Smart's volume. Can you seriously not find 3 points per game that Smart created out of thin air through hustle?
Thompson is a pure scorer. Smart makes up for his lack of shooting ability by creating extra possessions. They're just different players. You obviously can't put Smart as the feature of a team, but if you sneak him into a team surrounded by 5 great scorers, he can play like #55 for sure just like you can't make Capela a featured player of a team, but if you put him next to two hall of fame penetrating point guards, he's going to play like a top 50 player.
His on-off splits tell some of the story.
First, the Celtics overall shot no worse with him on the floor, in eFG% terms (51.9% on, 51.7% off). Because Smart is definitely a worse shooter than anyone else on the floor, it means that everyone else shoots better with him on the floor. So, some points come there - indeed, the C's offense was about 0.5 points better per 100 possessions with him on the court. That number seems related to our turning the ball over less with him out there, which is a quantifiable way that he produces more shots and therefore points. Other teams also have fewer blocks and steals with him out there, which is more evidence along the same lines.
And then defensively, other teams shoot worse (48% vs 50%), have fewer assists and also turn the ball over more often. Overall, our defense gives up almost 5 points per 100 possessions less.
I think the statistics do a pretty good job of matching the eye test, in this instance. The one thing that is probably under-valued in the eye test is his offensive impact. If he's disruptive defensively, we get more easy shots - maybe through fast breaks or something - so everyone else's offensive games get a little easier with him out there. He's also an underrated playmaker IMO.