Specific Criticism of Smart I'm Tired of Hearing

[Big333223]

1. Smart's terrible shooting makes everything else irrelevant.

2. Smart's defense and intensity on the court make his terrible shooting irrelevant.

I've seen a lot more of #1 than #2 but I've still seen both and both are equaling ridiculous. Smart has a problem with his shooting and needs to get better to play the position he plays in the NBA. Everyone agrees on that. But it does not mean that the rest of the stuff he does doesn't matter and vice versa. You can criticize parts of a player's game without making absolute statements about whether or not he should play/not play/be traded, et al.

/whining

I think thats more of a perception than the reality.

Plenty of people are rightfully critical of smart. Just because they dont throw, "but hes also good at defense which gives him x amount of value" at the end, doesnt mean they believe Smart is useless.

Likewise, when a poster says they love Smarts intensity and defensive abilities, I dont think they need to throw in "but his inability to score the basketball limits his upside" at the end of every post.

My issue is more that you cant criticize Smart without 9 people assuming you think hes completely useless and you cant praise the guy without 10 more people assuming you think hes Lebron James.

I'm in no way claiming that every criticism needs to come with some complimentary qualifier. I'm responding, specifically, to all the posts I see that claim that since Smart can't shoot, he should be traded or benched. Or the constant "Rozier is better than Smart" claims I keep seeing when Rozier is better at really only 1 or 2 facets of the game.