Report: Smart Signs 4 year, $77 million extension

[gouki88]

Marcus Smart retweeted Chris Mannix's "report" that Stevens was frustrated with Smart and was looking to trade him.

https://twitter.com/TheNBACentral/status/1422210933699579904

 

One thing that is totally unquestionable is his dedication to our franchise. If he can calm his game down (say, 36% shooter from 3, 44% from the field) then he's immediately on a bargain contract if his defence returns to previous levels.

[SHAQATTACK]

I’m not crazy about the deal, I was really excited about having that flexibility next offseason. But now that I’m thinking about it there could be a real upside here:

The Celtics sent a clear message to the players around the league that they are ready and willing to pay their own players. As good as Ainge was, and he was an incredible GM, but he was also very cutthroat. I think this shakes the whole Isaiah Thomas situation.

Locking up a role player at almost 20% of the cap is something else entirely.

Smart is not great as a PG or SG and this is why this extension was a Hard pill to swallow at his amount and years. . 

I like Smart , but not as the “Third Star “ player on this team. 

I feel we may have over committed here too to a role player ,  let  the flexibility to get a real star fizzle

To me it’s more of the same path DA would have taken ,  I would have been more bold and took a bigger swing for a upgrade over Smarts talent.

[Ed Monix]

My issue is Smart isn’t a point guard or an effective playmaker and unfortunately players don’t change at his age, he is what he is.

I have always said Smart would be perfect next to Harden or Doncic. That’s his most effective role in the NBA, especially since he he has become very proficient at catch and shoot three’s (44% on 4.4 per game). As the Celtics don’t have that type of player, Smart will continue to be overstretched for his capabilities.

From recent comments I believe Udoka is a huge fan of Marcus’, so this may be more his decision then Stevens. Perhaps Ime believe he can utilise Smart better then Stevens has done, so I guess we have to give it time till we can properly judge.

I am still bereft of knowledge about where PBS and Wyc are going with these moves. They let go of Daniel Theis and Evan Fournier but experts say don’t worry because the Celtics are clearing cap space for a max free agent, now they lock down Smart? IMO this leaves the Celtics in no mans land. The teams isn’t good enough to truely contend and is too good to collect a young star in the draft. We don’t have the assets to go and trade for a star, or the cap room to sign one.

[blink]

Evan Fournier money, with an extra year.  Does that make it an "unmovable" contract?

We're out of the max space game now.

It means they don’t want to move him.  But I have a feeling he’s more movable than Fournier would have been.  Cap could be 7-10% higher next year, and will be a minimum of 3%, so relative to the cap Smart’s deal is still cheaper.

In the off-season Smart will have four years left, all guaranteed.  Fournier will have two years left, plus a team option.  I think the two year deal will be at least equally moveable.

Regardless, the fan base has been misled a bit, no?  We’re told we can’t add long term free agents due to “flexibility”, then our ability to sign a max free agent (or bundle our expirings) is voluntarily surrendered.

Now, we’ve got no real flexibility, no way of winning in the near future.  We gave away the #16 pick not to becom competitive, but rather only to save money.  Now we’re locked into a team with a mediocre third best player for half of a decade.

Fireworks.

Why are we bringing up the Kemba trade again here? We all knew AND agreed that he needed to me moved, and he was moved. That we saved money is a bonus, that people began writing fan-fiction about next year and what not, that's another story. The team we traded him to, a team that is collecting picks left and right bought him off because of apparent low trade value...

Bringing the Kemba trade as "evidence" of ownership being cheap is not strengthening the argument, but distracting from it.

Where does anything above mention “evidence” of ownership being cheap?

We are a luxury tax team without being a contender and with no means to improve our roster next summer. That’s the reality of the situation. I’m not sure what you’re getting at.

Correct.  If we were content to be a mid-tier playoff team, we should have just kept Kemba for the next two seasons. Our ceiling would have been about the same, and we would have kept our pick.

So it's your argument that our team with Horford is not not more competitive than with Kemba? If that's your contention, then that's fine. I think we're better and more balanced without Kemba and with Horford on-board... even more so now that we have Schroder this season (but that shouldn't factor at this point).

We may be marginally better, but we are no closer to a championship.  We don’t have a clear direction, but we do have close to 100% of the cap tied up in three players, one of whom is a defense only role-player (who didn’t play much defense last year) and is a “team leader” that doesn’t seem to lead very much.

I have no problem with that characterization. I'm just saying that looking at the Kemba trade solely from a financial perspective of saving money is ludicrous and as evidence that ownership is cheap should be avoided. First the argument was that he was traded to avoid luxury tax (not by you  that I recall, but from others... which is flat out wrong), and here we are paying tax and a non-guaranteed contract away from being above the Apron.

So that the trade did in fact give us more options and financial flexibility shouldn't be seen as a negative, particularly if you agreed that at the very least it makes us "marginally better".

Now, the Smart contract is another issue entirely. I'm not sure if I agree with this contract, but I'm was in favor of playing above the cap next year anyways, so I have no problem with it in that regard at least. Also, it doesn't remove the value of Horford's contract as a tradable asset either, just lessens that value for us in our pursuit for cap space. A Beal S&T or trade this season was always going to be the more likely path, so it shouldn't be that much of a surprise that using cap space is now a bit more difficult.

I think the bolded part is the most important thing to keep in mind.  As many have described here, we would completely gut the team by trying to sign Beal into cap space.  We need to engineer a trade or a sign and trade to have any kind of decent line up around Tatum - Brown - (3rd star).  I think it was a bit of an overpay with Smart, but I don't see his contract as tough to move if he needs to go as part of a huge trade.  I think the fact that we resigned Smart doesn't = we keep him for the duration of his contract.  It makes it easier to trade him now, if that is what happens.

[Jvalin]

Evan Fournier money, with an extra year.  Does that make it an "unmovable" contract?

We're out of the max space game now.

It means they don’t want to move him.  But I have a feeling he’s more movable than Fournier would have been.  Cap could be 7-10% higher next year, and will be a minimum of 3%, so relative to the cap Smart’s deal is still cheaper.

In the off-season Smart will have four years left, all guaranteed.  Fournier will have two years left, plus a team option.  I think the two year deal will be at least equally moveable.

Regardless, the fan base has been misled a bit, no?  We’re told we can’t add long term free agents due to “flexibility”, then our ability to sign a max free agent (or bundle our expirings) is voluntarily surrendered.

Now, we’ve got no real flexibility, no way of winning in the near future.  We gave away the #16 pick not to becom competitive, but rather only to save money.  Now we’re locked into a team with a mediocre third best player for half of a decade.

Fireworks.

Why are we bringing up the Kemba trade again here? We all knew AND agreed that he needed to me moved, and he was moved. That we saved money is a bonus, that people began writing fan-fiction about next year and what not, that's another story. The team we traded him to, a team that is collecting picks left and right bought him off because of apparent low trade value...

Bringing the Kemba trade as "evidence" of ownership being cheap is not strengthening the argument, but distracting from it.

Where does anything above mention “evidence” of ownership being cheap?

We are a luxury tax team without being a contender and with no means to improve our roster next summer. That’s the reality of the situation. I’m not sure what you’re getting at.

Correct.  If we were content to be a mid-tier playoff team, we should have just kept Kemba for the next two seasons. Our ceiling would have been about the same, and we would have kept our pick.

So it's your argument that our team with Horford is not not more competitive than with Kemba? If that's your contention, then that's fine. I think we're better and more balanced without Kemba and with Horford on-board... even more so now that we have Schroder this season (but that shouldn't factor at this point).

We may be marginally better, but we are no closer to a championship.  We don’t have a clear direction, but we do have close to 100% of the cap tied up in three players, one of whom is a defense only role-player (who didn’t play much defense last year) and is a “team leader” that doesn’t seem to lead very much.

1. Smart isn't a defense-only player. He's a willing passer and a reliable PnR ball handler. Too bad we mostly use him off the ball.

2. The media may have gotten our plan wrong all along. You said it yourself numerous times: If we were to sign a max free agent, we'd have to gut our current roster. Not sure why you're complaining now. You didn't like the max-free-agent plan anyway.

Perhaps we are planning to go after Beal at the trade deadline or via a sign and trade next summer. If so, re-signing Smart ain't no problem whatsoever. Btw, I'm pretty sure we can trade Smart at the trade deadline. The rules are different this year due to the shortened season.

Horford + prospect(s) + picks for Beal/Siakam would be a valid trade, salary-wise.

Alternatively (this would be my #1 choice):

Smart + Schroder + JRich + picks for Simmons

[ozgod]

Might have been on the high side but I'm personally thrilled to see Smartacus remain a Celtic, hopefully for life. I think he brings a lot more good than bad to our team. I'm hoping that with better shooters around him and with the team focusing on him as a distributor, that that will curb some of his more cavalier instincts when it comes to taking low percentage shots. I just hope it does the same when it comes to low-percentage passes as well - Smartacus is usually a good ball handler but when he turns the ball over it's usually because he's trying for some highlight reel play, like an impossible pass into traffic or something similar.

[Birdman]

Yuck..hopefully trade in the future

[pablohoney]

I have always thought that trading for Beal at deadline makes more sense.  He is loyal to DC but if team is failing he may notify team he wants a trade.  If that happens, Celtics can give Washington expiring contracts, young players and picks.

If we try to sign Beal as free agent, we lose Smart, RW, Langford and possibly Nesmith too for nothing anyway as we have to decline all options and bird rights to open up max space.

I want Beal, but if the goal is to win a championship, giving up almost all of our assets to get him won’t bring a title.  As good as he is, he is not Durant or Lebron or Kawai.  He can’t deliver a deep playoff run by himself like those other stars so it’s better to trade for him IMO.

[ausbacker]

Not a fan of this extension either for the player or at the price however, I am willing to give Smart a chance as I am all the players mainly because we haven't seen how the team will function under the new HC.

[dannyboy35]

   I think the Celts were in an impossible situation. I was t a Brad fan as a coach but I’m staying open about his new role.
   The Horford deal I’m with some that leans to thinking this was a Danny deal waiting to happen anyways. Obviously I don’t really know that , though! All guessing really.
   JRich I liked cuz I’ve never viewed him as a guy with an ego. I’m a little surprised due to the shot for Brad but also support it over giving Fournier 20 plus. I’m just not comfortable with Fournier out there needing a stop. I always feel if he stops a guy we got away with something.
   Smart deal…I did think 17 could be taken as an insult. I know we’re talking millions but I would get it if Smart was hurt if they wouldn’t go higher. Then Smart walks. ( hypothetically)
   Boston would annihilate Brad and the whole Celtic organization. It would be IT  times 10. If we missed out on a max guy wanting to come aboard snd Smart gone? Forget it. Too damaging. Shouldn’t be that way but I definitely believe it would be big trouble for the franchise and how we treat our players. It’s not equal and I think it’s  a lot of it is so dumb. But we’re talking casual Boston here, too. People need Marcus to say “ this is how I played or play  “ when in reality these people were the types that all hung their head snd did t get back on defense when they missed two shots in a row.
   Adam Jones ( who is insufferable) basically said this snd I laughed because it’s so true. Smart is very important to Celtics NON die hards I think even more to the most bleeding green fan.
   

[Vermont Green]

NBA contracts always seem to high to me when they are first signed, and then soon enough, other comparable players are getting even bigger contracts.  So here we go again, this contract seems a little high to me at $77M.  I thought the $68M rumor seemed more in line and fair.   But in the big scheme of things, that $9M difference won't make any difference over time.

Smart is good and extremely versatile player with some flaws.  I think it is easier to understand the value of a position specific player like a PG or PF.  It is harder to judge the value of the versatility that Smart brings.  If Schroder gets hurt, Smart is your full time PG.  If Richardson gets hurt, Smart takes that role.  Someone in foul trouble, Smart can defend the opposing PF.

I have said this before but if he just makes one more 3 per week and maybe eliminates one or two bad shots a week, his numbers change quite a bit.  He goes from say 34% to 38% on 3s and his overall FG% gets to a decent spot also.  Add this modest improvement to everything else he does and he can play to this contract.

I don't think this contract will be a problem if they want to use him is a big trade at some point but I also don't think that is the plan.  I am sure it is acknowledged within the brain trust as a trade option but he is viewed as a core part of the team right now, more than Schroder or Richardson.

[td450]

Now a lot of the near term future of the franchise rides on Marcus.

If Udoka can coax better decision making out of him and he holds up physically, this all works out. If he doesn't improve at all and/or begins to break down, this deal will be a major block to any championship opportunities.

[footey]

Interesting that at the end of the day Celtics management valued Smart over Fournier. They both got about the same per season, and actually Fournier is for one less year (4th year team option). 

Seems like a strong vote of defense over offense.  Hope that they are correct. I still worry about lacking a third guy who can get buckets on his own. 

[Moranis]

I’m not crazy about the deal, I was really excited about having that flexibility next offseason. But now that I’m thinking about it there could be a real upside here:

The Celtics sent a clear message to the players around the league that they are ready and willing to pay their own players. As good as Ainge was, and he was an incredible GM, but he was also very cutthroat. I think this shakes the whole Isaiah Thomas situation.

Locking up a role player at almost 20% of the cap is something else entirely.

Smart is not great as a PG or SG and this is why this extension was a Hard pill to swallow at his amount and years. . 

I like Smart , but not as the “Third Star “ player on this team. 

I feel we may have over committed here too to a role player ,  let  the flexibility to get a real star fizzle

To me it’s more of the same path DA would have taken ,  I would have been more bold and took a bigger swing for a upgrade over Smarts talent.

He doesn't have a 3rd star type contract.  I just don't think people understand what players are making these days.  Smart has a contract more inline with a #4 than he does with a #3 on a contender. 


The numbers below are this year, the cap is obviously going to be even higher next year.

Milwaukee's 3rd best player makes over 30 million this year.

The Lakers' 3rd best player makes over 44 million this year (the top 2 are 41 and 36).

The Nets 3rd best player is just under 35 million and the 4th is just over 17 million (basically what Smart's extension starts at).

The Sixers 3 best players 36, 33, 32.

The Clippers 3rd best player makes over 18 million this year.

The Warriors have 4 players over 24 million.

Utah's top 4 contracts - 35, 28, 21, 18.5.

The Nuggets with Porter still on his rookie deal have 2 guys at 30 million and then another at 16.5 and another at 15.6.  Porter will be more than that.

The Suns have 2 guys over 30 and Ayton is still on his rookie contract (he will get a huge bump soon).


Smart's contract is more than I would have wanted to pay, but it is absolutely inline with what the 4th best player on a contender would reasonably make, especially when you have younger players on lower contracts surrounding him. 

[Roy H.]

I’m not crazy about the deal, I was really excited about having that flexibility next offseason. But now that I’m thinking about it there could be a real upside here:

The Celtics sent a clear message to the players around the league that they are ready and willing to pay their own players. As good as Ainge was, and he was an incredible GM, but he was also very cutthroat. I think this shakes the whole Isaiah Thomas situation.

Locking up a role player at almost 20% of the cap is something else entirely.

Smart is not great as a PG or SG and this is why this extension was a Hard pill to swallow at his amount and years. . 

I like Smart , but not as the “Third Star “ player on this team. 

I feel we may have over committed here too to a role player ,  let  the flexibility to get a real star fizzle

To me it’s more of the same path DA would have taken ,  I would have been more bold and took a bigger swing for a upgrade over Smarts talent.

He doesn't have a 3rd star type contract.  I just don't think people understand what players are making these days.  Smart has a contract more inline with a #4 than he does with a #3 on a contender. 


The numbers below are this year, the cap is obviously going to be even higher next year.

Milwaukee's 3rd best player makes over 30 million this year.

The Lakers' 3rd best player makes over 44 million this year (the top 2 are 41 and 36).

The Nets 3rd best player is just under 35 million and the 4th is just over 17 million (basically what Smart's extension starts at).

The Sixers 3 best players 36, 33, 32.

The Clippers 3rd best player makes over 18 million this year.

The Warriors have 4 players over 24 million.

Utah's top 4 contracts - 35, 28, 21, 18.5.

The Nuggets with Porter still on his rookie deal have 2 guys at 30 million and then another at 16.5 and another at 15.6.  Porter will be more than that.

The Suns have 2 guys over 30 and Ayton is still on his rookie contract (he will get a huge bump soon).


Smart's contract is more than I would have wanted to pay, but it is absolutely inline with what the 4th best player on a contender would reasonably make, especially when you have younger players on lower contracts surrounding him.

Weren’t you suggesting just about the exact opposite with the Fournier signing?  That we couldn’t afford $19 million per year for a guy who should be a number four on a championship team?