Forget Tony Allen ... is Smart a guard version of Draymond Green?

[PhoSita]

We've already covered this ground.   Marcus Smart is a below-average 3-point shooter.  There's some 200 players in this league who shot a higher 3-point percentage than Smart last year... and of players who average at least 3 attempts this year, Smart is ranked 101 out of 112 qualified players... So can we please stop using Smart's below-average three point shooting as an excuse for his poor offensive abilities?  Just stop it... it doesn't make any sense. 

Here's the logic. Let's lay it out really simple and clear so you can't ignore it and return to your facile response-baiting comparison.


Players who can hit a respectable percentage from deep (i.e. at or near break-even: 33%) can play a useful role in a modern NBA offense, regardless of their other skills.

Players who cannot hit a respectable percentage from deep (see above), are a major detriment to a modern NBA offense, unless they bring something else to the table that prevents opponents from ignoring them.

Tony Allen cannot hit a respectable percentage from deep, and he doesn't bring anything else to the table offensively that prevents opponents from ignoring him.  This is why TA hurts the Grizzlies on offense almost as much as he helps them on defense.  That and his poor ball-handling and passing (Smart is light years better, already) have kept him from becoming a star.

Marcus Smart has shown that he can hit a respectable percentage from deep, though he has struggled to consistently make opponents fear other aspects of his offensive game (he's starting to get to the line more this year, though).


Smart doesn't have to be even an average three point shooter to be a better offensive player than Tony Allen.  He just has to shoot well enough to keep other teams from ignoring him.  He was able to do that as a rookie, and there's plenty of reason to believe he's going to keep improving.


Ultimately, Smart's ceiling will be decided by what other aspects he adds to his game.  He doesn't even need to become much better than a 33% three point shooter (which, again, he nearly did as a rookie attempting 4 shots from deep per game).

[LarBrd33]

We've already covered this ground.   Marcus Smart is a below-average 3-point shooter.  There's some 200 players in this league who shot a higher 3-point percentage than Smart last year... and of players who average at least 3 attempts this year, Smart is ranked 101 out of 112 qualified players... So can we please stop using Smart's below-average three point shooting as an excuse for his poor offensive abilities?  Just stop it... it doesn't make any sense. 

Here's the logic. Let's lay it out really simple and clear so you can't ignore it and return to your facile response-baiting comparison.


Players who can hit a respectable percentage from deep (i.e. at or near break-even: 33%) can play a useful role in a modern NBA offense, regardless of their other skills.

That's where you lost me.   33% from three is below average.  He spent the second half of his rookie season regressing to 31%.  Smart is shooting 25% from three this season.   So far, his three point shooting isn't respectable. 

[crimson_stallion]

See title.

Smart's been compared to Tony Allen around here, and not exactly as a compliment.

Unfortunately, that comparison fails because Tony's total lack of shooting means that as much as he helps a defense, he has a tendency to hurt an offense almost as much on the other end. 

Really? 

Huh?  Marcus Smart is a horrible shooter.  He misses long, he misses short, he misses left, he misses right.  He shoots the ball way too high and it comes down very heavy.  It's too bad, because he'd be dominant if he could shoot, but I'm sorry to say it but I think both Tony Allen and Rondo are/were better shooters than Smart.

You can think whatever you want, but stats and reality point to Smart being a better shooter.  Maybe not as good at finishing inside, but a better shooter

Smart's career FG%: .364
Rondo's career FG%  .468
Allen's career FG%:  .478

I know Rondo and Allen drive more, but that's part of the game.  Smart is flat out a bad shooter.  Trust me, I hope he improves, but it doesn't look promising.  And arguing semantics over who's better between 3 bad shooters is besides the point.  Smart can't shoot.

Since when does FG% tell you anything about how good a "shooter" somebody is?

By your logic Omer Asik (53% FG) is a better shooter than Marcus Smart, and Rondo and Tony Allen are better shooters than Avery Bradley.  That makes no sense at all.

Everybody shoots higher percentages 3 feet from the basket - hell even I can do that.  That's where Rondo and Allen have gotten something like 40%-50% of their field goals.  Making layups says nothing about how good a shooter somebody is.

Or should we be more specific and replace "shooter" with "jump shooter" just to clarify things?

[PhoSita]

We've already covered this ground.   Marcus Smart is a below-average 3-point shooter.  There's some 200 players in this league who shot a higher 3-point percentage than Smart last year... and of players who average at least 3 attempts this year, Smart is ranked 101 out of 112 qualified players... So can we please stop using Smart's below-average three point shooting as an excuse for his poor offensive abilities?  Just stop it... it doesn't make any sense. 

Here's the logic. Let's lay it out really simple and clear so you can't ignore it and return to your facile response-baiting comparison.


Players who can hit a respectable percentage from deep (i.e. at or near break-even: 33%) can play a useful role in a modern NBA offense, regardless of their other skills.

That's where you lost me.   33% from three is below average.  He spent the second half of his rookie season regressing to 31%.  Smart is shooting 25% from three this season.   So far, his three point shooting isn't respectable.

You keep referring to the "average" as if this is relevant to how the opponent defends him.

Point blank -- the Celtics' opponents actually try to guard Smart.  That's not true of Tony Allen.  The Warriors killed the Grizzlies in the playoffs once they decided to just stop bothering to cover TA at all off the ball.


This is where my comparison to Draymond Green comes in, by the way.  Green averaged 33.7% on about 4 three point attempts last year.  Barely higher than Smart, and that was with the luxury of playing off Stephen Curry and Klay Thompson.

Draymond Green is a below average shooter, but opponents actually have to guard him.  That makes all the difference.


By the way, Smart is currently shooting 39.3% from the corner for his career.

[LarBrd33]

We've already covered this ground.   Marcus Smart is a below-average 3-point shooter.  There's some 200 players in this league who shot a higher 3-point percentage than Smart last year... and of players who average at least 3 attempts this year, Smart is ranked 101 out of 112 qualified players... So can we please stop using Smart's below-average three point shooting as an excuse for his poor offensive abilities?  Just stop it... it doesn't make any sense. 

Here's the logic. Let's lay it out really simple and clear so you can't ignore it and return to your facile response-baiting comparison.


Players who can hit a respectable percentage from deep (i.e. at or near break-even: 33%) can play a useful role in a modern NBA offense, regardless of their other skills.

That's where you lost me.   33% from three is below average.  He spent the second half of his rookie season regressing to 31%.  Smart is shooting 25% from three this season.   So far, his three point shooting isn't respectable.

You keep referring to the "average" as if this is relevant to how the opponent defends him.

Point blank -- the Celtics' opponents actually try to guard Smart.  That's not true of Tony Allen.  The Warriors killed the Grizzlies in the playoffs once they decided to just stop bothering to cover TA at all off the ball.


This is where my comparison to Draymond Green comes in, by the way.  Green averaged 33.7% on about 4 three point attempts last year.  Barely higher than Smart, and that was with the luxury of playing off Stephen Curry and Klay Thompson.

Draymond Green is a below average shooter, but opponents actually have to guard him.  That makes all the difference.

There were 200 players in the league who shot a higher 3P% than Smart last season.  Even if you filter it to only players who shot 4+ threes per game (Smart shot 4.1), he was 57th out of 68 players. 

And you guys consistently seem to say this was evidence of his offensive competence.  I don't get this discussion.  I'm too stupid for it.  I'll move on.

[PhoSita]

I don't get this discussion.  I'm too stupid for it.  I'll move on.

You don't get it because you refuse to have a discussion that is on somebody else's terms instead of your own.

[LarBrd33]

I don't get this discussion.  I'm too stupid for it.  I'll move on.

You don't get it because you refuse to have a discussion that is on somebody else's terms instead of your own.

Bottom line is that Smart's an exceptional defensive prospect.  He could very well develop into a competent offensive player.  He's young.  It's early in his career.  You never know.  But at this point in his career, it's a real reach to say he's been good on that end and when people use things like his TS% (bad) or his 3P% (bad) as evidence, I start to feel like I'm out of my depth.   My basketball knowledge only goes so far.  I've not yet ventured into the world where players who suck at conventional stats and suck at unconventional advanced stats have actually maybe been pretty good.   Us oldtimers and our field goal percentages and hollingers aren't familiar with this newage hippie stuff.  Maybe point me in the right direction... basketball-faith-stats.org or something? 

[LarBrd33]

Pho, you do bring up some good points though.  I get what you mean about fitting into modern offenses.   There's wasn't as big a push for Allen to shoot from deep, though.  We live in a world where even someone considered a conventional center (DeMarcus Cousins) is taking 4 threes per game and shooting 45% while doing it.   The game is evolving.  But I watched Tony back in the day and he could finish at the hoop... that counts for something.  Sure it's just one faucet of offense, but it's an important one.  Look at our best offensive player, for instance, Isaiah Thomas.  Thomas is a decent shooter... Thomas is an exceptional finisher.  You can't base your evaluation of Thomas's offense purely on his shooting... you can't ignore Tony Allen's ability to finish.  So I'm curious... How does Allen's % at the hoop compare to Smart's thus far?  I genuinely haven't looked it up. 

Also thanks for pointing out Smart's corner shooting.  That's interesting.  How's he rank as a corner shooter?

[GreenFaith1819]

Not too far off in the comparison....even from the mentality side of it.

Marcus doesn't run his mouth as much as Draymond (YET), but even THAT could change as he continues to get better, lol...

The more improvement and experience Marcus accrues he'll continue to be an irritant to our opposing backcourts and this is GREAT - I wouldn't mind that at all.

KG.2.

But please - no talking to the Basketball supports. And for Heaven's sake no yelling at opposing players while you're in street clothes.

[crimson_stallion]

I think the common argument here from defensive fans is that Smart would be totally capable of shooting a Tony Allen-esque 48% if he wasn't spending so much of his energy shooting from distance...

I have no idea where you got/get this from.  Absolutely no clue in the world.  I feel like you're just completely making things up as you go along now - unless somebody suggested this and I missed it? 

I don't think anybody here has suggested that if Smart wasn't shooting threes, he'd be shooting ~48% from the field.  That would be 100% pure conjecture.  So far for his career he has shot 42% on two, so there is absolutely no evidence to suggest that Smart would shoot anywhere near 48% if he was taking less threes.

and the fact that Smart's 3 point shooting is better than Allen's (though, it actually might not be... Smart is shooting 25% from three this season... Allen is a career 27% shooter from distance) somehow proves that Smart is a good offensive player.   We've already covered this ground.   

Again, I think you are just completely fabricating things as you go along now.

Who has ever said that Marcus Smart is a good offensive player?  I certainly didn't.  I don't think anybody here did.  Nobody here has even said that Marcus Smart is a good shooter.

Also it would be extremely silly to compare Marcus Smart to Tony Allen based on the 7 game sample size that is this season.  He has played 74 games so far as a pro, and over that stretch he has shot 32.5% from three. 

Tony Allen has only shot better than 32.5% twice in his 12 NBA seasons, and his career average of 27.0% is well below what Smart has shot thus far despite FAR fewer attempts.

Marcus Smart is a below-average 3-point shooter.  There's some 200 players in this league who shot a higher 3-point percentage than Smart last year... and of players who average at least 3 attempts this year, Smart is ranked 101 out of 112 qualified players... So can we please stop using Smart's below-average three point shooting as an excuse for his poor offensive abilities?    Just stop it... it doesn't make any sense.

The NBA average for three point shooting is 34.1% - Smart so far for his career is shooting 32.5%. 

That's a whopping 1.5% below the league average - [dang] near insignificant.

It's pretty safe to say that Marcus Smart is approximately average as a three point shooter, if not then incredibly close to it.  Certainly close enough to classify as "respectable". 

Tony Allen's career percentage of 27% is nowhere near the average, and hence nowhere near respectable. 

Also worth nothing that the league average for assists is 2.0  - Smart's career average (3.1) is significantly above that.  Tony Allen's career average (1.4) is significantly below it.

I'm not sure exactly why you try to single out three point shooting as the only offensive factor separating Smart and Allen.  As I've said countless times in the past, it's his all-round offensive competency that makes him a far superior offensive player to Tony Allen.

Three point shooting is part of that.  So is ball handling.  So is court vision.  So is Basketball IQ.  So is passing.  There are a number of areas in which Marcus Smart is competent, but Tony Allen is not.  Yet the only single category that Allen has a significant advantage over Smart is his FG% (specifically, the ability to get to the basket and finish there).

I am completely bewildered as to why you constantly ignore these other factors - are they not part of 'offense'?

[crimson_stallion]

Bottom line is that Smart's an exceptional defensive prospect.  He could very well develop into a competent offensive player.  He's young.  It's early in his career.  You never know.  But at this point in his career, it's a real reach to say he's been good on that end and when people use things like his TS% (bad) or his 3P% (bad) as evidence, I start to feel like I'm out of my depth.

Please see the bold sections of text quoted above - I think herein likes the reason for your significant confusion.

We are suggesting that Marcus Smart's competent three point shot is one of the things that helps contribute to him being a competent offensive player.

You are trying to argue why he is he is not a good offensive player with a good three point shot.

The difference between these two concepts is significant, as per the below definitions:

Competent: acceptable and satisfactory, though not outstanding
Good: of high quality; excellent

There is a substantial gap between what we are arguing Marcus Smart is, and what you are arguing Marcus Smart isn't.  If you were to focus a little more on actually understanding the argument we are making, then perhaps you may find that our arguments aren't quite as far apart as you think.

What we mean by competent three point shooter is that when Marcus Smart has the ball at the three point line, his shot is decent enough that the defense actually has to respect his shot and send a defender at him.

What we mean by competent offensive player is that Marcus Smart can actually be trusted to bring the ball up the court under moderate-to-heavy defensive pressure and make moderately challenging passes without a high risk of turning the ball over.

Neither of the latter three points (competent shooting, ball handling and passing) are true of Tony Allen.  Hence why he is not considered by us to be a competent offensive player.

But I watched Tony back in the day and he could finish at the hoop... that counts for something.  Sure it's just one faucet of offense, but it's an important one. 

I have marked the critical part in bold - the fact that Tony Allen only has one faucet to his offense.

No matter how good he might be at that one thing, he is still incredibly limited overall offensively.

Look at our best offensive player, for instance, Isaiah Thomas.  Thomas is a decent shooter... Thomas is an exceptional finisher.  You can't base your evaluation of Thomas's offense purely on his shooting... you can't ignore Tony Allen's ability to finish.  So I'm curious... How does Allen's % at the hoop compare to Smart's thus far?  I genuinely haven't looked it up. 

Tony Allen for his career has shot 60.6% from inside three feet, and has a free throw rate of 37.4%.

Marcus Smart for his career has shot 57.4% from inside three feet, and has a free throw rate of 28.6%.

It is worth nothing however that this in his rookie year (at the age of 23) Tony Allen only shot 59.5% inside three feet, and his free throw rate was only 39.3%.  It's also known that Smart was nursing an ankle injury his rookie year, and lacked the explosiveness to be able to get to the basket.

This year (at the age of 21) Marcus Smart is shooting 70% from inside three feet, and he has a three throw rate of 41.7% (up there with Isaiah Thomas).

There is no question that Tony Allen was better at getting (and scoring) in the paint - you would hope so, since that is quite literally the only single aspect of his offensive game that was better than Smart's. 

However Smart has definitely been more effective in the paint this year, and while the sample size is still small, it's something I will be keeping an eye on.  If he can continue to finish in the paint and draw fouls at anywhere near the current rates then his offensive upside will skyrocket from where it was last season.

[LilRip]

in a year or two, Smart will be an all-star and all these comparisons will seem silly. In about a decade, we'll be talking about how some rookie we drafted could be a mini-Smart or the next Smart.

Pardon my green goggles but I really think that Smart will be something special in this league. He lacks consistency right now, which is something that plagues young guys, but I can see the potential. His offensive game needs some leveling up but he already has everything you need: court vision, IQ, post game, cutting, can shoot from anywhere, drives, handles, and hands. It's just a matter of improving each skill, which comes with experience and time (and high work ethic).

He'll never be statistically dominant in the likes of CP3 who usually go in the first round of fantasy, but he will eventually have about early to mid-round value. Not saying that Fantasy is the end-all be-all measure of a player but generally, elite players are also pretty elite in fantasy and limited players also have lower value.

[LarBrd33]

Crimson, nice points.  TP.  You and I have different definitions of "competent", I guess.  Smart isn't a competent 3-point shooter.  He isn't a competent offensive player.  As you illustrated, he's below average on both fronts.  All of this can change, so it's not worth stressing over.  Smart's a man with potential.  He has a good feel for the game.   There's not much point in discussing whether or not Smart will some day reach Allen's level.   He seems to have to tools to eventually surpass him.  If he doesn't, it will be a major disappointment based on what we expected him to be coming into the league.   

I still see Smart as our best asset (right now I rank his trade value above the Brooklyn pick).  So whether or not we agree on his offensive game at this point doesn't really matter.  He's valuable because of his perceived potential... not because of what he's bad at right now.  Every game I hope the kid breaks out.  He followed up a great performance against OKC with a shooting dud, but he was active and made an impact in other ways.  I've been on board with the Smart bandwagon since before everyone agreed with me that we should tank.