Author Topic: Smart for Wiseman?  (Read 10953 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Smart for Wiseman?
« Reply #30 on: October 22, 2020, 03:35:58 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58539
  • Tommy Points: -25636
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
I think that some of you are really underrating the defensive impact of Smart.  Langford isn’t in the ballpark with him defensively.


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: Smart for Wiseman?
« Reply #31 on: October 22, 2020, 03:40:01 PM »

Offline gift

  • NCE
  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3984
  • Tommy Points: 291
I'd move Smart for the 2nd pick and wouldn't give it a second thought.  No idea if Wiseman would be my target (Ball also intrigues me as does the Israeli Avdija), but I'd do that from a value standpoint.  Smart's value to actually winning has been greatly overstated on this board throughout the years.  I mean even this year, Boston was 10-3 without Smart (and one of the losses was the meaningless last game in the bubble).  Smart is a great defender and a bulldog, and those are useful skills to have, but they don't necessarily equate to winning, especially for someone that has been so bad shooting the ball (and with his volume), who turns the ball over, who doesn't rebound, etc.  I mean seriously of the main rotation, Smart ranks just about last on the team in TS%, TOV%, TRB%, WS/48, etc.  His skills by and large just don't equate to winning basketball because he is just as likely to take a terrible shot or make a terrible decision as he is to make a defensive stop or hustle play.  And I have just as much confidence that Brown or someone else will make the defensive stop that Smart would have, but who won't give it right back on the offensive end like Smart invariably does.

I have a little part of me that agrees with you Moranis. I may be overreaching, but are all-nba defensive guards perhaps the position that correlates least championships/contention of all the all-nba and all-nba defensive teams? They seem like floor-raisers, but not ceiling-raisers. Perhaps this is because of the way the rules benefit offensive guards?

I completely understand the question, but have no idea of the answer either.

Theoretically, we can break all impact into units. Typically we'd see types of impact like units of offense and units of defense with the ability of some units of offense/defense to impact each other (e.g. missed layups correlated with high percentage shots for the other team or offensive rebounds correlated with fatigue over time for teams that fail to secure defensive rebounds). But within these types of units, there would also be elite units. These would represent abilities that are rarely found in players. However, these elite abilities might not be as valuable as standard units since standard units might be applied on 35% percent of possessions where truly elite ability might only become applicable on 5% of possessions.

So let's say that Smart is truly elite defensively. How often does his elite ability actually impact a given possession? Maybe a player who can match his standard defensive unit output, fail to approach his elite defensive output, but increase standard offensive output by 10% has more reliable effectiveness on an given possession.

Re: Smart for Wiseman?
« Reply #32 on: October 22, 2020, 03:46:18 PM »

Offline footey

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15965
  • Tommy Points: 1833
I think that some of you are really underrating the defensive impact of Smart.  Langford isn’t in the ballpark with him defensively.

I’d say Langford defensive chops are underrated. As a rookie despite injuries he played at a level at least as good as Smart rookie year.

Re: Smart for Wiseman?
« Reply #33 on: October 22, 2020, 04:17:33 PM »

Online Vermont Green

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11225
  • Tommy Points: 860
I think that some of you are really underrating the defensive impact of Smart.  Langford isn’t in the ballpark with him defensively.

I’d say Langford defensive chops are underrated. As a rookie despite injuries he played at a level at least as good as Smart rookie year.

I agree with Roy on this one.  Langford appears to be a good young defensive player with the potential to sometime in the future, to be good enough to be a rotation NBA player.  That is all really good for a 20 year old who was the 14th pick.  Marcus Smart is a player who has demonstrated he can impact an NBA game right now.

Trading Smart for Wiseman would be a step back for the Celtics.  Maybe sometime in the future, Wiseman helps the team even more but many draft picks end up never helping the team that drafted them.  I don't want to trade a player that I know will help me win right now for a player that may or may not help me win in the future.  Just not a risk worth taking for this team at this time.

Now if they would take Langford and say #14 for Wiseman, great, that is trading two chances at some potential for one chance at even more potential.  That kind of trade I would do.  But I suspect GSW wouldn't value Langford all that highly and they can probably get a better deal for the #2 pick from someone.

Re: Smart for Wiseman?
« Reply #34 on: October 22, 2020, 04:26:03 PM »

Offline DefenseWinsChamps

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6043
  • Tommy Points: 766
I think that some of you are really underrating the defensive impact of Smart.  Langford isn’t in the ballpark with him defensively.

I don't think I'm underestimating the defensive impact of Smart. I think he's better than Langford likely ever will be. I think I'm downplaying the value that a defensive stalwart with an offensively questionable game like Smart has.

For example, let's say Smart is a 10 on defense and Langford is a 7 (in his better moments he was). Let's also say that Gobert is a 10 on defense and Rob Williams is a 7. Both sets of players might have a difference of 3 in our arbitrary rating. However, the difference between a good and an elite guard defender is not as beneficial to your team as the difference between a good and an elite big man defender.

The main question I have is what value that defensive difference brings to the overall team's effectiveness on the court.

This difference is also exacerbated by Smart's offense, where he is extremely prone to poor shots, bad offensive efficiency (especially if teams chase him off the 3), turnovers and ineffective hero ball.

Re: Smart for Wiseman?
« Reply #35 on: October 22, 2020, 04:47:06 PM »

Offline DefenseWinsChamps

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6043
  • Tommy Points: 766
I think that some of you are really underrating the defensive impact of Smart.  Langford isn’t in the ballpark with him defensively.

I’d say Langford defensive chops are underrated. As a rookie despite injuries he played at a level at least as good as Smart rookie year.

I agree with Roy on this one.  Langford appears to be a good young defensive player with the potential to sometime in the future, to be good enough to be a rotation NBA player.  That is all really good for a 20 year old who was the 14th pick.  Marcus Smart is a player who has demonstrated he can impact an NBA game right now.

Trading Smart for Wiseman would be a step back for the Celtics.  Maybe sometime in the future, Wiseman helps the team even more but many draft picks end up never helping the team that drafted them.  I don't want to trade a player that I know will help me win right now for a player that may or may not help me win in the future.  Just not a risk worth taking for this team at this time.

Now if they would take Langford and say #14 for Wiseman, great, that is trading two chances at some potential for one chance at even more potential.  That kind of trade I would do.  But I suspect GSW wouldn't value Langford all that highly and they can probably get a better deal for the #2 pick from someone.

Similarly to how Brown and Tatum were able to take a step forward without Irving, I wonder if the "step backward" would be cancelled out by the fact that Brown and Tatum both get more shots and opportunities to distribute.

Re: Smart for Wiseman?
« Reply #36 on: October 22, 2020, 04:57:56 PM »

Offline pearljammer10

  • K.C. Jones
  • *************
  • Posts: 13129
  • Tommy Points: 885
Zero interest in this.

Re: Smart for Wiseman?
« Reply #37 on: October 22, 2020, 05:02:23 PM »

Online Vermont Green

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11225
  • Tommy Points: 860
I think that some of you are really underrating the defensive impact of Smart.  Langford isn’t in the ballpark with him defensively.

I’d say Langford defensive chops are underrated. As a rookie despite injuries he played at a level at least as good as Smart rookie year.

I agree with Roy on this one.  Langford appears to be a good young defensive player with the potential to sometime in the future, to be good enough to be a rotation NBA player.  That is all really good for a 20 year old who was the 14th pick.  Marcus Smart is a player who has demonstrated he can impact an NBA game right now.

Trading Smart for Wiseman would be a step back for the Celtics.  Maybe sometime in the future, Wiseman helps the team even more but many draft picks end up never helping the team that drafted them.  I don't want to trade a player that I know will help me win right now for a player that may or may not help me win in the future.  Just not a risk worth taking for this team at this time.

Now if they would take Langford and say #14 for Wiseman, great, that is trading two chances at some potential for one chance at even more potential.  That kind of trade I would do.  But I suspect GSW wouldn't value Langford all that highly and they can probably get a better deal for the #2 pick from someone.

Similarly to how Brown and Tatum were able to take a step forward without Irving, I wonder if the "step backward" would be cancelled out by the fact that Brown and Tatum both get more shots and opportunities to distribute.

I don't think Smart is going to hold back Brown or Tatum in any way.

If you trade Smart and Langford comes back next year, stays healthy, and plays way better than he did this year, you will have made a great trade.  Or, if Wiseman steps in as a rookie and plays meaningful minutes as a rotation big, also great trade.  But I think the likely outcome is neither Langford or Wiseman help the team even close to the way that Smart would help the team, at least next season.

Three years from now, who knows, maybe Wiseman is a budding all star and Langford is a legit starting wing.  That is not the kind of outcome we need right now though.   It is not smart for this team to trade part of the here and now for some future promise, at least not in my opinion.

Re: Smart for Wiseman?
« Reply #38 on: October 22, 2020, 05:32:38 PM »

Offline DefenseWinsChamps

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6043
  • Tommy Points: 766
I think that some of you are really underrating the defensive impact of Smart.  Langford isn’t in the ballpark with him defensively.

I’d say Langford defensive chops are underrated. As a rookie despite injuries he played at a level at least as good as Smart rookie year.

I agree with Roy on this one.  Langford appears to be a good young defensive player with the potential to sometime in the future, to be good enough to be a rotation NBA player.  That is all really good for a 20 year old who was the 14th pick.  Marcus Smart is a player who has demonstrated he can impact an NBA game right now.

Trading Smart for Wiseman would be a step back for the Celtics.  Maybe sometime in the future, Wiseman helps the team even more but many draft picks end up never helping the team that drafted them.  I don't want to trade a player that I know will help me win right now for a player that may or may not help me win in the future.  Just not a risk worth taking for this team at this time.

Now if they would take Langford and say #14 for Wiseman, great, that is trading two chances at some potential for one chance at even more potential.  That kind of trade I would do.  But I suspect GSW wouldn't value Langford all that highly and they can probably get a better deal for the #2 pick from someone.

Similarly to how Brown and Tatum were able to take a step forward without Irving, I wonder if the "step backward" would be cancelled out by the fact that Brown and Tatum both get more shots and opportunities to distribute.

I don't think Smart is going to hold back Brown or Tatum in any way.

If you trade Smart and Langford comes back next year, stays healthy, and plays way better than he did this year, you will have made a great trade.  Or, if Wiseman steps in as a rookie and plays meaningful minutes as a rotation big, also great trade.  But I think the likely outcome is neither Langford or Wiseman help the team even close to the way that Smart would help the team, at least next season.

Three years from now, who knows, maybe Wiseman is a budding all star and Langford is a legit starting wing.  That is not the kind of outcome we need right now though.   It is not smart for this team to trade part of the here and now for some future promise, at least not in my opinion.

I mean, you could argue that he's taking shots from Tatum and Brown. He's averaging 11 shots a game on 38% FG shooting.

Re: Smart for Wiseman?
« Reply #39 on: October 22, 2020, 06:31:29 PM »

Offline Who

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 47135
  • Tommy Points: 2401
I would do it in a heartbeat. I love Smart but Wiseman is a serious talent and well worth the risk of trading Smart.

Re: Smart for Wiseman?
« Reply #40 on: October 22, 2020, 11:30:45 PM »

Offline Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33461
  • Tommy Points: 1533
I think that some of you are really underrating the defensive impact of Smart.  Langford isn’t in the ballpark with him defensively.

I don't think I'm underestimating the defensive impact of Smart. I think he's better than Langford likely ever will be. I think I'm downplaying the value that a defensive stalwart with an offensively questionable game like Smart has.

For example, let's say Smart is a 10 on defense and Langford is a 7 (in his better moments he was). Let's also say that Gobert is a 10 on defense and Rob Williams is a 7. Both sets of players might have a difference of 3 in our arbitrary rating. However, the difference between a good and an elite guard defender is not as beneficial to your team as the difference between a good and an elite big man defender.

The main question I have is what value that defensive difference brings to the overall team's effectiveness on the court.

This difference is also exacerbated by Smart's offense, where he is extremely prone to poor shots, bad offensive efficiency (especially if teams chase him off the 3), turnovers and ineffective hero ball.
I think the thing you aren't really looking at is quite simply offense is significantly more important to winning any given game than defense is and as good as Smart is defensively he is ever bit as bad offensively.  I mean we've seen that phenomenon for the last 5 years first hand with our starting PG's.  Great to elite offensive talents that are terrible defensively, yet they are net positives overall to the win column.  Even Kemba is a poor defensive player (not as poor as Irving or Thomas, but still poor). 

The Celtics W/L record when Smart misses games is every bit as good as when he plays for basically his entire career.  He really doesn't matter all that much to actual wins and losses and I do think that is a large part because he is just so awful offensively.  Defense matters of course, just not as much as offense.  The saying that good offense always beats good defense is absolutely true, and that is, and always has been, Smart's downfall.

As for the trade, as I said, I have no idea who I'd take with 2, but you can sign me up for trading a terrible offensive elite level defensive role player for the 2nd pick in the draft, every second of every day.  I don't care what draft it is, if Boston doesn't end up with a better player than Smart, then that is just bad drafting. 
2023 Historical Draft - Brooklyn Nets - 9th pick

Bigs - Pau, Amar'e, Issel, McGinnis, Roundfield
Wings - Dantley, Bowen, J. Jackson
Guards - Cheeks, Petrovic, Buse, Rip

Re: Smart for Wiseman?
« Reply #41 on: October 23, 2020, 01:03:33 AM »

Offline Uncle_Stingfinger

  • Brad Stevens
  • Posts: 229
  • Tommy Points: 9
i would take a chance at wiseman in a second.   smart can be replaced.

Re: Smart for Wiseman?
« Reply #42 on: October 23, 2020, 01:16:34 AM »

Offline gouki88

  • NCE
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31552
  • Tommy Points: 3141
  • 2019 & 2021 CS Historical Draft Champion
I would do it in a heartbeat. I love Smart but Wiseman is a serious talent and well worth the risk of trading Smart.
I think I've come around fully to this idea. The more I think about and watch tape of Wiseman the more I think he's legit
'23 Historical Draft: Orlando Magic.

PG: Terry Porter (90-91) / Steve Francis (00-01)
SG: Joe Dumars (92-93) / Jeff Hornacek (91-92) / Jerry Stackhouse (00-01)
SF: Brandon Roy (08-09) / Walter Davis (78-79)
PF: Terry Cummings (84-85) / Paul Millsap (15-16)
C: Chris Webber (00-01) / Ralph Sampson (83-84) / Andrew Bogut (09-10)

Re: Smart for Wiseman?
« Reply #43 on: October 23, 2020, 01:22:08 AM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58539
  • Tommy Points: -25636
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
Quote
  He really doesn't matter all that much to actual wins and losses

It’s very difficult to measure things like this, but there are metrics that try.  For instance, RPM is an attempt to measure impact.  Smart is 42nd in the league, putting him in the top 10% of all players.

I don’t think Smart is impact neutral.  He’s a positive player who makes major contributions.  I don’t think his value is necessarily the second pick in the draft, but I could see a team offering a top-10 pick for him.


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: Smart for Wiseman?
« Reply #44 on: October 23, 2020, 04:58:21 AM »

Offline Somebody

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7816
  • Tommy Points: 560
  • STAND FIRM, SAY NO TO VIBE MEN
Quote
  He really doesn't matter all that much to actual wins and losses

It’s very difficult to measure things like this, but there are metrics that try.  For instance, RPM is an attempt to measure impact.  Smart is 42nd in the league, putting him in the top 10% of all players.

I don’t think Smart is impact neutral.  He’s a positive player who makes major contributions.  I don’t think his value is necessarily the second pick in the draft, but I could see a team offering a top-10 pick for him.
And metrics like RPM underrate Smart's defensive impact on our team due to how often he's tasked to defend bigger players in our smaller lineups. His defence alone likely puts him into top 40 consideration according to decades of data as well as context (eg. the eye test, historical examples of similar defenders, etc). He's a really valuable player who gets even more valuable on better and better teams due to how additive his strengths are (you don't really get diminishing returns on great defence as well as shooting and very good extra passing).
Jaylen Brown for All-NBA