Did Turner really stunt Smart's development?

[mctyson]

Yes.  Smart lost out on primary ball-handling and PnR opportunities with our second unit because Turner was better at it.  That's not a bad thing, but it did stunt his development.

[BornReady]

I voted no
But the answer is really vague

I believe smart is more of a SG rather than PG
As he isn't that good of a primary playmaker and ball handler
So he probably would never become a primary playmaking PG

I think Stevens knew that smart wasn't a PG after a couple games
And decided to emphasise his defensive capabilities and focus on improving his off ball offence

So turner being a point forward didn't really stunt smart developing

[jambr380]

To me, Smart is a true combo guard with the ability to guard the SF position. In his rookie season, Smart was starting along with Turner. Last season, both were relegated to the bench and assumed essentially the same duties.

Turner didn't necessarily stunt Smart's growth; as a competitive team in the East, we were in non-tanking mode and needed a veteran to handle the ball. Turner proved to be a better player than most would have expected. But, Smart also didn't get free reign to work out his mistakes. I guess we should all just be hopeful that Smart was brought along at the right speed and is now ready to flourish.

[BudweiserCeltic]

Not in the slightest... just the contrary.

[positivitize]

I'm not sure why I clicked on the thread of Smart-haters. There's no possible way that I could have enjoyed this post without getting angry.

Some people have pointed out Turner's reluctance to ever pass the ball to Smart if there's more than 5 seconds on the shot-clock.

Some people have pointed out how Turner handling the ball kinda made Smart redundant in the second unit and relegated the later to waiting on the 3 point line.

Yes. Now that Turner is gone, Smart will need to step up. Yes. Now that Turner is gone, Smart WILL step up.

I liked ET, but I'm glad he got his money and Smart gets this chance.

[dannyboy35]

I agree with this last post. I'm not s big smart guy but ofcourse there's a chance he becomes very good. I don't think turner didn't want to pass him the ball. I put this on Stevens. He didn't allow smart to make mistakes and take over pg duties. It's not smart's fault or turner's. I just think smart should have been doing this two years ago and thru no fault of his own he's starting out late with responsibilities he should have been given long ago. I don't even want to count my chickens he'll be given the chance. I could see Stevens still spotting him up in the corner so Rozier handles it now that it's been revealed Rozier has game. All because we got injuries. Otherwise Rozier wouldn't have got a chance.

[dannyboy35]

But god forbid anybody criticise "the best asset we have" in Stevens. I'm being sarcastic because that's a load of bull.

[__ramonezy__]

I voted no
But the answer is really vague

I believe smart is more of a SG rather than PG
As he isn't that good of a primary playmaker and ball handler
So he probably would never become a primary playmaking PG

I think Stevens knew that smart wasn't a PG after a couple games
And decided to emphasise his defensive capabilities and focus on improving his off ball offence

So turner being a point forward didn't really stunt smart developing

^^^^ I agree with this 100%. Smart's development trajectory is Kawhii, Dwyane Wade or Jimmy Butler. All started as defensive minded slashers and then developed their shot, with Wade developing a mean post up and mid-range game. Trying to force Smart into a PG is a square peg in a round hole.

[Celtics4ever]

I am not a Smart hater but you'd be a fool to think he is a good shooter.  He shot .35% from the field last year.

http://stats.nba.com/player/#!/203935/

That has to improve.   I really appreciate all the little things he does but he needs to improve this area or team's won't care about his development.  We needed ET's offense, Smart needs to become more accurate.   That is a fact.

Yes. Now that Turner is gone, Smart will need to step up. Yes. Now that Turner is gone, Smart WILL step up.

He has too!

I believe smart is more of a SG rather than PG
As he isn't that good of a primary playmaker and ball handler
So he probably would never become a primary playmaking PG

Then he better improve his shooting.

[chiken Green]

There is no way that having Turner did not affect Smart..  Turner was the only player on the Roster who had to have the ball in his hands..  As a coach your hands are tied in how to use the kid so you simply bump your more versatile player to his weakest position..

Marcus Smart is a combo Guard who can handle the ball and Can run the offense.. Forcing him to be STRICTLY a 2 guard on side of ET was a recipe for personal disaster  but CBS had no choice because of ET's limitations not because of Smarts versatility.

And for those who think Rozier took Smarts Minutes because he was better than Smart should go back and look at the stat-lines again. Smarts minutes went up in the playoffs, not down.

I believe that CBS was trying to keep things as consistent as possible so he kept ET and Smart together as long as he could and gave Rozier more of Bradley's minutes.

Turner was a Vet who knew the score. He did what he had to do to get the next deal.. It worked for him and It will work better for us now.

[Denis998]

I think he is best fit as a SG. Maybe a combo guard at best, not a primary ball handler.

[feckless]

You guys just don't get it Marcus is not a point--he does not have the instincts or sense of a point--Chris Paul understands the game and ball movement--Evan Turner understood ball movement better than our other guards----Brad saw this--Terry Rozier has shown a little potential as a PG---Marcus has shown zero understanding of what it takes to be a PG--we all understand this talent is not in Avery's DNA--well it is also not in Marcus's DNA--he can play---has value, but has shown nothing that should lead anyone to believe he will ever be a PG--the Tony Allen comparison is very much true as far as I have seen!  Marcus does not think, see or understand passing or running an offense--repetition is not enough.

Also posted under the Evan Turner replacement thread!

[loco_91]

I voted yes. Smart's natural position is PG, as his best offensive skill is passing. He has the vision, timing and accuracy to be the guy that initiates the offense. He won't be a ball-dominant PG who breaks down the defense, but he can be the guy who runs the initial action and makes a simple pass to put a teammate in a good position.

What he isn't is a guy who should be running off screens or spotting up for 3-- that is, a shooting guard. That type of action leads to contested 3's, wild drives into the teeth of the defense, all the things that Smart has proven to be bad at.

[CoachBo]

Nope. Smart had more than enough opportunities to do more within the offense than he was actually doing but he was unable to take those opportunities. It was his limitations that were the problem. Not Evan Turner.

This.

Smart is badly limited offensively, and that's the issue. He's not as talented as some are so desperate to believe.

[CoachBo]

You guys just don't get it Marcus is not a point--he does not have the instincts or sense of a point--Chris Paul understands the game and ball movement--Evan Turner understood ball movement better than our other guards----Brad saw this--Terry Rozier has shown a little potential as a PG---Marcus has shown zero understanding of what it takes to be a PG--we all understand this talent is not in Avery's DNA--well it is also not in Marcus's DNA--he can play---has value, but has shown nothing that should lead anyone to believe he will ever be a PG--the Tony Allen comparison is very much true as far as I have seen!  Marcus does not think, see or understand passing or running an offense--repetition is not enough.

Also posted under the Evan Turner replacement thread!

Agree with this as well. His judgment with the basketball isn't good enough to run an NBA offense at this point.