Smith's got age on his side but you could easily argue that if you put him on the Celts today he'd be their fourth best player.
You could definitely easily argue that, but I'm not sure it'd be very convincing. Josh Smith's best talent is his defense, and in that regard (according to advanced metrics) he's got everyone of the big 4 by a nice margin. He's also the best rebounder of the bunch, the most athletic, and as you said, he's got age on his side.
Basically, he's probably the worst offensive player of the bunch, all things being equal.
Some advanced stats may show him to be better than Rondo/PP/KG by a nice margin, many will show him to be worse by quite a large margin, including how well he guards his opponent. You're pushing Smith because of his defense over two players who were first team all-defense last year and haven't dropped off from there. I'm comfortable with my argument.
Aside from opponent PER, which stats are you talking about?
For starters on 82games you could look at things like opposing eFG%, or check out their defensive numbers on synergy sports. Smith is a very good defender, but the competition's pretty stiff among the players in question.
See that 82games number its just...just not an accurate representation. Or, at least it doesn't mean what its logical that it would me.
You'd see the number and think, "That's how well he defends other players at that position while he plays that position", but its completely box-score based.
Synergy sports, for instance, I also have pretty big issue with. If a guy has a terrible P&R partner, maybe he ranks out as a bad P&R player, independent of his own control.
Also, maybe a guy who is a pretty stellar defender, if he's got a bunch of weak defenders behind him, or a coach who isn't putting the right defensive gameplan forward, ranks out as a poor defender.
First of all you've gone from "Josh Smith's best talent is his defense, and in that regard (according to advanced metrics) he's got everyone of the big 4 by a nice margin" to explaining why you think that advanced stats are meaningless because most of them seem to point in the other direction.
That is not what happened. Defensive metrics (dRTG, DWS) do point to Smith being better defensively by a significant margin. Opposing player PER isn't a reliable statistic, and the fact that only 82 games.com uses it, despite its availability to everyone out there, speaks volumes.
Also, 'most' defensive metrics don't state that Smith is the inferior player. Synergy sports uses a completely different methodology than anyone else out there, and their stuff is basically subjective counting stats. The benefit is that they actually need to watch a game to get a number, but if you want me to discuss why I think that the numbers are merely a piece, not a picture, I will.
Secondly, you're comparing Smith to some of the best defenders in the game. He might not be worse, but it's quite a stretch to claim that he's markedly better.
I never claimed he was markedly better. I said according to advanced metrics (dRTG, DWS being the operative statistics here, and in the evolving statistics forum, really the only two that have stuck around that are defensive in nature), he was markedly better, and he is.
I dunno, I'd say if we just flat out added Josh Smith to the Celtics without taking any of the guys currently on the team away, I think he'd be the 3rd best scorer, the 2nd or 3rd best defender, and the best rebounder. I think his body of work and his play this year speaks to that as a logical conclusion.
Smith's rebounding percentage is pretty much identical to KG and Wilcox. He may or may not be our best rebounder. He also takes more shots than anyone on the Celts, I don't think that would continue. He might be 3rd in scoring, he may be 4th, I'd say right around Ray. He wouldn't be better than Rondo. He'd score less and rebound about the same as KG, I'd say edge to KG. He'd score less than PP, whether he'd be the better player or not is up for debate.
I don't see which of those three players you think that Smith is so much better than that you wouldn't even argue the point.
Josh Smith is a better scorer than KG due to his versatility alone. He's having a down year so far because he's being asked to do too much, but typically his TS% is right around 53.5%. With Rondo and the band helping him score more, I thought that number would return, or even improve. Pierce is our best and most versatile scorer, and I'd put Ray Allen's efficiency next. Smith is more versatile than KG, so I'd say he edges out KG.
In terms of defense, I'd say KG then Rondo/Smith. I think Rondo's a better defensive player empirically, but what Smith brings as a help defender > what rondo brings at the point as a defender.
Topic: Celtics pursuing Josh Smith? (rumor) (Read 43683 times)