ESPN NBARank

[Erik]

NBARank is out again.

http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/24651811/nbarank-2018-19-100-51-best-players-season

Celtics players:
Rozier - #82
Smart - #55
Brown -
Tatum -
Hayward -
Horford -
Irving -

[BitterJim]

Wow, they ranked Smart very different than SI (unranked vs 55). It looks like they agree that we have 5 top 50 players, though

[Roy H.]

Smart at 55 seems silly...  That puts him in the top 12% of NBA players, which just doesn't seem right to me at all.

[Erik]

BTW one of the commentators spoiled the 49th ranked player as Myles Turner in the article discussing the list:

Herring: Myles Turner is at No. 49, and I recognize how young he still is. But at some point, he has to show some true progression. To his credit, he has extended his range since his rookie year and has become an average 3-point shooter. But since logging 16 points, almost nine rebounds and one assist per 36 minutes as a rookie, he has basically turned in two seasons with exactly the same metrics. The Pacers have real talent, and I think they could realistically crack the Eastern Conference's top three if Turner ascends into something more. But he has to start realizing some of that potential we keep waiting for in order for that to happen.

[nickagneta]

Smart at 55 seems silly...  That puts him in the top 12% of NBA players, which just doesn't seem right to me at all.

Same here. Yes, he is a defensive gem but he can't shoot or score efficiently to save his life. I think a rating down around where Rozier is ranked is more appropriate.

[Big333223]

Smart at 55 seems silly...  That puts him in the top 12% of NBA players, which just doesn't seem right to me at all.

If you count hustle and grit as basketball skills he's gotta be in the top 1% there. That swing from the SI list to the ESPN list is perfectly Marcus, though. That they've got him ranked above Andrew Wiggins puts a smile on my face.

Markelle Fultz at #93 is weird. Based on what?

Deandre Jordan at #80 feels maybe a little disrespectful for a guy who averaged 15 boards a game last year. I guess his defensive lapses were pretty bad.

Lonzo Ball at #62 feels like the ESPN hype machine.

Millsap and Porzingis outside the top 50 and ranked lower than Joe Ingles feels suspect.

[Erik]

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.

[nickagneta]

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.

2 things in response to this:

1. I read an article going back a few years that stats the Celtics accrue and bring up to the players are deflected passes, turnovers created and winning 50/50 balls. I am guessing Smart is one of the best, if not the best, on the team in those stats.

2. Thompson is a pure scorer offensively, but he is also a tremendous defensive player. Just thought that should be added in.

[Erik]

2 things in response to this:

1. I read an article going back a few years that stats the Celtics accrue and bring up to the players are deflected passes, turnovers created and winning 50/50 balls. I am guessing Smart is one of the best, if not the best, on the team in those stats.

2. Thompson is a pure scorer offensively, but he is also a tremendous defensive player. Just thought that should be added in.

Can you rephrase #1? I think there may have been a typo somewhere. No disagreement with Thompson as a defensive player. Was just trying to show how overblown offensive efficiency really is unless you're a high volume shooter. We can argue over how ****ty of a shooter Smart is, but at the end of the day, he's only realistically costing us like 2-3 ppg and as someone who watched all 82 games, I'm positive that the difference on the other end is more than 3 points. The only time he's worse than the 3 points I've cited is when he is required by his team to put up a ton of points: he isn't. We have more than enough scorers on the Celtics. He just has to not be completely useless on offense to the point that he doesn't get guarded on the 3 point line (ahem Simmons, Roberson, Old Rondo).

[action781]

Smart at 55 seems silly...  That puts him in the top 12% of NBA players, which just doesn't seem right to me at all.

I agree and I don't think "top 12%" does enough justice of how high of a ranking #55 really represents.  Another way of looking at #55 overall ranking would be, "If all NBA players were put into a pool and drafted by all the teams cb-draft style, then Marcus Smart would be some team's 2nd round pick".  That sounds crazy to me.

[Erik]

Smart at 55 seems silly...  That puts him in the top 12% of NBA players, which just doesn't seem right to me at all.

I agree and I don't think "top 12%" does enough justice of how high of a ranking #55 really represents.  Another way of looking at #55 overall ranking would be, "If all NBA players were put into a pool and drafted by all the teams cb-draft style, then Marcus Smart would be some team's 2nd round pick".  That sounds crazy to me.

Well, the rankings are for one year only so a draft is something completely different where you factor in age and career projection. In that version, LeBron probably isn't even #1 and Tatum would probably be top 10.

There also aren't enough stars in the league to have a feature player in the 2nd round guaranteed. The same exercise can be played with a lot of the other 56-100 players. Yeah, I'd also be super p---ed if Drew Bledsoe is my 2nd round pick -- either one.

Let's say you are drafting for 1 year though: the person who gets #55 (Smart) also gets #6, in a snake format, which according to SI is roughly Giannis (and Markkanen at #66). Smart + Giannis + Markkanen seems like a good team. All in all, it doesn't matter because whoever gets LeBron is going to win the championship in a fair league like this. It basically took 4 top 20 players to beat LeBron by himself.

[Vermont Green]

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.

Another way to look at this is that if Smart can make a couple more 3s per week and/or a couple more 2s per week (convert misses to makes), he is an all star.  He may not be able to do this but it is kind of like an MLB player getting a couple more hits each week is the difference between hitting 0.250 and being a utility infielder and hitting say 0.320 and being an all-star.

Smart is that close.  Now is he 52nd best or 72nd best, I don't know, but I like Smart.

[nickagneta]

2 things in response to this:

1. I read an article going back a few years that stats the Celtics accrue and bring up to the players are deflected passes, turnovers created and winning 50/50 balls. I am guessing Smart is one of the best, if not the best, on the team in those stats.

2. Thompson is a pure scorer offensively, but he is also a tremendous defensive player. Just thought that should be added in.

Can you rephrase #1? I think there may have been a typo somewhere. No disagreement with Thompson as a defensive player. Was just trying to show how overblown offensive efficiency really is unless you're a high volume shooter. We can argue over how ****ty of a shooter Smart is, but at the end of the day, he's only realistically costing us like 2-3 ppg and as someone who watched all 82 games, I'm positive that the difference on the other end is more than 3 points. The only time he's worse than the 3 points I've cited is when he is required by his team to put up a ton of points: he isn't. We have more than enough scorers on the Celtics. He just has to not be completely useless on offense to the point that he doesn't get guarded on the 3 point line (ahem Simmons, Roberson, Old Rondo).

Sure. Regarding #1, the Celtics as an organization, as a tool for their coaching staff, keep stats on a bunch of different things that the NBA doesn't keep stats on. Some of those stats are:

Deflected passes
Turnovers created by player
Won 50/50 balls
Shots effected though not blocked

Stuff like that. They do the stats upon review of the game film.

[keevsnick]

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.

3 ppg is the amount he costs u offensively by shooting. The harder number to calculate is what he costs you when guys just dont guard him. The other team can often let Smarts defender roam around the paint when hes out there because he doesnt shoot well or finish well. This means Irving Brown, Tatum face extra defenders dropping their percentages. I dont know what the cumulative point difference is, and Smart does make up quite a bit with his hustle plays. He is still a net positive, but you do lose more than 3ppg offensively I  am sure of that.

[mqtcelticsfan]

Smart at 55 seems silly...  That puts him in the top 12% of NBA players, which just doesn't seem right to me at all.

Yeah, that’s basically saying he’d be somewhere between the 2nd and 3rd best player on a team if talent was evenly distributed. That seems insane to me.