Josh Smith available

[sofutomygaha]

2. I don't know how to build a winner around Rondo and Smith- two excellent ball handlers, penetrators, and passers who can nonetheless be either dared to shoot or fouled mercilessly depending on their proximity to the basket. I do know that if you add even one more player to that starting five who can't hit an open shot, you're screwed (Rondo's promising re-invention as a midrange shooter notwithstanding).

If you could build an ideal team around the Rondo-Smith connection, it would have to include a center who can play decent interior defense, can shoot, and doesn't clog the paint (sorry, Al Jefferson. You'd need a Garnett-Bosh-Aldridge-Horford type). Then you'd need two wings with catch-and-shoot skills.

You don't have to look very hard for a winning duo that compares to Rondo/Smith.  Look at the Kidd/Martin Nets that made back-to-back finals and then took the eventual champion Pistons to 7 games.

Obviously that team fell short of greatness, but not by all that much.  And they didn't have anything close to the center you are talking about - they had freaking Jason Collins.  Nor were their wings great catch and shoot players.  Kittles and Jefferson were solid but unexceptional shooters, but good defenders.  Not all that unlike Bradley and Green.

Rondo/Smith gives you the foundation of an excellent defensive team that can suction up defensive boards, turn teams over and field a dangerous transition attack.  Sure, you'd need to do a lot better than Jason Collins at center and add the offensive 6th man that Nets were never able to land, but that isn't all that tall of a task.

That's a really good comparison, Snively. Tommy point.

[pokeKingCurtis]

Josh Smith went 1/16 outside 3 feet. 5/20 overall.

But 6 rebounds, 6 assists, 3 steals.

I have a feeling he'll be as frustrating, if not more, than JG. A different kind of frustration but nonetheless frustrating. Less hopeless exasperation and more hair pulling frustration.

With his trade value being complete junk (?)...I'd love to take a gamble.

Grass is always greener, I guess.

[slamtheking]

Josh Smith went 1/16 outside 3 feet. 5/20 overall.

But 6 rebounds, 6 assists, 3 steals.

I have a feeling he'll be as frustrating, if not more, than JG. A different kind of frustration but nonetheless frustrating. Less hopeless exasperation and more hair pulling frustration.

With his trade value being complete junk (?)...I'd love to take a gamble.

Grass is always greener, I guess.

at this point, Josh Smith is reminding me a lot of Antoine.

- competitive
- good ball-handling forward
- good rebounder
- bad shot selection that could be reinforced by making their first outside shot and bricking the next 10
-tantalizing talent that never quite reaches what it could be

[Fafnir]

Josh Smith went 1/16 outside 3 feet. 5/20 overall.

But 6 rebounds, 6 assists, 3 steals.

I have a feeling he'll be as frustrating, if not more, than JG. A different kind of frustration but nonetheless frustrating. Less hopeless exasperation and more hair pulling frustration.

With his trade value being complete junk (?)...I'd love to take a gamble.

Grass is always greener, I guess.

at this point, Josh Smith is reminding me a lot of Antoine.

- competitive
- good ball-handling forward
- good rebounder
- bad shot selection that could be reinforced by making their first outside shot and bricking the next 10
-tantalizing talent that never quite reaches what it could be

Antoine wasn't a good rebounder from the day he got his first big contract.

[Moranis]

2. I don't know how to build a winner around Rondo and Smith- two excellent ball handlers, penetrators, and passers who can nonetheless be either dared to shoot or fouled mercilessly depending on their proximity to the basket. I do know that if you add even one more player to that starting five who can't hit an open shot, you're screwed (Rondo's promising re-invention as a midrange shooter notwithstanding).

If you could build an ideal team around the Rondo-Smith connection, it would have to include a center who can play decent interior defense, can shoot, and doesn't clog the paint (sorry, Al Jefferson. You'd need a Garnett-Bosh-Aldridge-Horford type). Then you'd need two wings with catch-and-shoot skills.

You don't have to look very hard for a winning duo that compares to Rondo/Smith.  Look at the Kidd/Martin Nets that made back-to-back finals and then took the eventual champion Pistons to 7 games.

Obviously that team fell short of greatness, but not by all that much.  And they didn't have anything close to the center you are talking about - they had freaking Jason Collins.  Nor were their wings great catch and shoot players.  Kittles and Jefferson were solid but unexceptional shooters, but good defenders.  Not all that unlike Bradley and Green.

Rondo/Smith gives you the foundation of an excellent defensive team that can suction up defensive boards, turn teams over and field a dangerous transition attack.  Sure, you'd need to do a lot better than Jason Collins at center and add the offensive 6th man that Nets were never able to land, but that isn't all that tall of a task.

That's a really good comparison, Snively. Tommy point.

It is close, but Kidd was a great foul shooter in those days and Martin was not an outside player at all.  He hung out almost entirely in the post.

[Fafnir]

Watching Kenyon depants Walker in the post so badly is what first soured me on his game.

[BballTim]

2. I don't know how to build a winner around Rondo and Smith- two excellent ball handlers, penetrators, and passers who can nonetheless be either dared to shoot or fouled mercilessly depending on their proximity to the basket. I do know that if you add even one more player to that starting five who can't hit an open shot, you're screwed (Rondo's promising re-invention as a midrange shooter notwithstanding).

If you could build an ideal team around the Rondo-Smith connection, it would have to include a center who can play decent interior defense, can shoot, and doesn't clog the paint (sorry, Al Jefferson. You'd need a Garnett-Bosh-Aldridge-Horford type). Then you'd need two wings with catch-and-shoot skills.

You don't have to look very hard for a winning duo that compares to Rondo/Smith.  Look at the Kidd/Martin Nets that made back-to-back finals and then took the eventual champion Pistons to 7 games.

Obviously that team fell short of greatness, but not by all that much.  And they didn't have anything close to the center you are talking about - they had freaking Jason Collins.  Nor were their wings great catch and shoot players.  Kittles and Jefferson were solid but unexceptional shooters, but good defenders.  Not all that unlike Bradley and Green.

Rondo/Smith gives you the foundation of an excellent defensive team that can suction up defensive boards, turn teams over and field a dangerous transition attack.  Sure, you'd need to do a lot better than Jason Collins at center and add the offensive 6th man that Nets were never able to land, but that isn't all that tall of a task.

That's a really good comparison, Snively. Tommy point.

It is close, but Kidd was a great foul shooter in those days and Martin was not an outside player at all.  He hung out almost entirely in the post.

  You'll never get an exact match. We'd rather have Smith avoid being an outside player in any case.

[Evantime34]

IMO it's all about value when you are rebuilding.

If you can get Josh Smith for Gerald Wallace and Keith Bogans because Detroit is looking to shed his salary, you do it because it adds value to your team. (I would prefer to do this after the season so we can lock up a nice draft pick)

In the end I think he probably ends up in Phoenix (wouldn't it be fun to see Smith finally in an uptempo offense? Surrounded by shooters he could just run the court, rebound and block shots and not have to worry about jumpers), or Charlotte

[kozlodoev]

If you can get Josh Smith for Gerald Wallace and Keith Bogans because Detroit is looking to shed his salary, you do it because it adds value to your team. (I would prefer to do this after the season so we can lock up a nice draft pick)

I'd be shocked if Detroit gives away Smith for Wallace and Bogans (that's not even that much of a salary dump), but stranger things have happened when teams are desperate.

[LooseCannon]

IMO it's all about value when you are rebuilding.

If you can get Josh Smith for Gerald Wallace and Keith Bogans because Detroit is looking to shed his salary, you do it because it adds value to your team. (I would prefer to do this after the season so we can lock up a nice draft pick)

Or, you don't do it unless you think you can deal Smith later because acquiring him is the sort of move that can lock a team onto the dreaded treadmill of mediocrity.

[BleedGreen1989]

2. I don't know how to build a winner around Rondo and Smith- two excellent ball handlers, penetrators, and passers who can nonetheless be either dared to shoot or fouled mercilessly depending on their proximity to the basket. I do know that if you add even one more player to that starting five who can't hit an open shot, you're screwed (Rondo's promising re-invention as a midrange shooter notwithstanding).

If you could build an ideal team around the Rondo-Smith connection, it would have to include a center who can play decent interior defense, can shoot, and doesn't clog the paint (sorry, Al Jefferson. You'd need a Garnett-Bosh-Aldridge-Horford type). Then you'd need two wings with catch-and-shoot skills.

You don't have to look very hard for a winning duo that compares to Rondo/Smith.  Look at the Kidd/Martin Nets that made back-to-back finals and then took the eventual champion Pistons to 7 games.

Obviously that team fell short of greatness, but not by all that much.  And they didn't have anything close to the center you are talking about - they had freaking Jason Collins.  Nor were their wings great catch and shoot players.  Kittles and Jefferson were solid but unexceptional shooters, but good defenders.  Not all that unlike Bradley and Green.

Rondo/Smith gives you the foundation of an excellent defensive team that can suction up defensive boards, turn teams over and field a dangerous transition attack.  Sure, you'd need to do a lot better than Jason Collins at center and add the offensive 6th man that Nets were never able to land, but that isn't all that tall of a task.

That's a really good comparison, Snively. Tommy point.

It is close, but Kidd was a great foul shooter in those days and Martin was not an outside player at all.  He hung out almost entirely in the post.

This is where the comparison falls flat on it's face.

Martin never thought he was Ray Allen.

He stayed within himself and played his game.

[snively]

2. I don't know how to build a winner around Rondo and Smith- two excellent ball handlers, penetrators, and passers who can nonetheless be either dared to shoot or fouled mercilessly depending on their proximity to the basket. I do know that if you add even one more player to that starting five who can't hit an open shot, you're screwed (Rondo's promising re-invention as a midrange shooter notwithstanding).

If you could build an ideal team around the Rondo-Smith connection, it would have to include a center who can play decent interior defense, can shoot, and doesn't clog the paint (sorry, Al Jefferson. You'd need a Garnett-Bosh-Aldridge-Horford type). Then you'd need two wings with catch-and-shoot skills.

You don't have to look very hard for a winning duo that compares to Rondo/Smith.  Look at the Kidd/Martin Nets that made back-to-back finals and then took the eventual champion Pistons to 7 games.

Obviously that team fell short of greatness, but not by all that much.  And they didn't have anything close to the center you are talking about - they had freaking Jason Collins.  Nor were their wings great catch and shoot players.  Kittles and Jefferson were solid but unexceptional shooters, but good defenders.  Not all that unlike Bradley and Green.

Rondo/Smith gives you the foundation of an excellent defensive team that can suction up defensive boards, turn teams over and field a dangerous transition attack.  Sure, you'd need to do a lot better than Jason Collins at center and add the offensive 6th man that Nets were never able to land, but that isn't all that tall of a task.

That's a really good comparison, Snively. Tommy point.

It is close, but Kidd was a great foul shooter in those days and Martin was not an outside player at all.  He hung out almost entirely in the post.

This is where the comparison falls flat on it's face.

Martin never thought he was Ray Allen.

He stayed within himself and played his game.

K-Mart wasn't quite as eager to chuck from deep as Smith, but he certainly wasn't bashful about shooting the ball, especially in New Jersey. 

He shot 3s, he bricked Js, he regularly shot well under 50%.

Compare Smith and Martin in basketball-reference's play index - up to age 28 it's like you're looking at the same player. 

Per 36, K-Mart actually shot a tiny bit more than Smith.  They posted a virtually identical TS%.  Smith is a smidgen better on the boards, better in assists, better blocking shots and a little worse turning the ball over.

Moving away from statistics I'd give K-Mart the edge as an overall defender (tougher, more committed), but Smith the edge as an offensive player (capable of creating for himself and teammates).  In terms of overall impact, I'd rate them almost identical. 

[snively]

2. I don't know how to build a winner around Rondo and Smith- two excellent ball handlers, penetrators, and passers who can nonetheless be either dared to shoot or fouled mercilessly depending on their proximity to the basket. I do know that if you add even one more player to that starting five who can't hit an open shot, you're screwed (Rondo's promising re-invention as a midrange shooter notwithstanding).

If you could build an ideal team around the Rondo-Smith connection, it would have to include a center who can play decent interior defense, can shoot, and doesn't clog the paint (sorry, Al Jefferson. You'd need a Garnett-Bosh-Aldridge-Horford type). Then you'd need two wings with catch-and-shoot skills.

You don't have to look very hard for a winning duo that compares to Rondo/Smith.  Look at the Kidd/Martin Nets that made back-to-back finals and then took the eventual champion Pistons to 7 games.

Obviously that team fell short of greatness, but not by all that much.  And they didn't have anything close to the center you are talking about - they had freaking Jason Collins.  Nor were their wings great catch and shoot players.  Kittles and Jefferson were solid but unexceptional shooters, but good defenders.  Not all that unlike Bradley and Green.

Rondo/Smith gives you the foundation of an excellent defensive team that can suction up defensive boards, turn teams over and field a dangerous transition attack.  Sure, you'd need to do a lot better than Jason Collins at center and add the offensive 6th man that Nets were never able to land, but that isn't all that tall of a task.

That's a really good comparison, Snively. Tommy point.

It is close, but Kidd was a great foul shooter in those days.

Yeah, but overall efficiency wise he was very similar to Rondo.  He could hit an occasional 3 and knock his free throws down, but he didn't have Rondo's knack for scoring in the paint.

[slamtheking]

Josh Smith went 1/16 outside 3 feet. 5/20 overall.

But 6 rebounds, 6 assists, 3 steals.

I have a feeling he'll be as frustrating, if not more, than JG. A different kind of frustration but nonetheless frustrating. Less hopeless exasperation and more hair pulling frustration.

With his trade value being complete junk (?)...I'd love to take a gamble.

Grass is always greener, I guess.

at this point, Josh Smith is reminding me a lot of Antoine.

- competitive
- good ball-handling forward
- good rebounder
- bad shot selection that could be reinforced by making their first outside shot and bricking the next 10
-tantalizing talent that never quite reaches what it could be

Antoine wasn't a good rebounder from the day he got his first big contract.

Antoine was a good rebounder when he chose to be or when we needed a clutch defensive rebound after that contract. 

[BballTim]

2. I don't know how to build a winner around Rondo and Smith- two excellent ball handlers, penetrators, and passers who can nonetheless be either dared to shoot or fouled mercilessly depending on their proximity to the basket. I do know that if you add even one more player to that starting five who can't hit an open shot, you're screwed (Rondo's promising re-invention as a midrange shooter notwithstanding).

If you could build an ideal team around the Rondo-Smith connection, it would have to include a center who can play decent interior defense, can shoot, and doesn't clog the paint (sorry, Al Jefferson. You'd need a Garnett-Bosh-Aldridge-Horford type). Then you'd need two wings with catch-and-shoot skills.

You don't have to look very hard for a winning duo that compares to Rondo/Smith.  Look at the Kidd/Martin Nets that made back-to-back finals and then took the eventual champion Pistons to 7 games.

Obviously that team fell short of greatness, but not by all that much.  And they didn't have anything close to the center you are talking about - they had freaking Jason Collins.  Nor were their wings great catch and shoot players.  Kittles and Jefferson were solid but unexceptional shooters, but good defenders.  Not all that unlike Bradley and Green.

Rondo/Smith gives you the foundation of an excellent defensive team that can suction up defensive boards, turn teams over and field a dangerous transition attack.  Sure, you'd need to do a lot better than Jason Collins at center and add the offensive 6th man that Nets were never able to land, but that isn't all that tall of a task.

That's a really good comparison, Snively. Tommy point.

It is close, but Kidd was a great foul shooter in those days and Martin was not an outside player at all.  He hung out almost entirely in the post.

This is where the comparison falls flat on it's face.

Martin never thought he was Ray Allen.

He stayed within himself and played his game.

  The Nets went to the finals in 02 and 03. In both of those seasons, according to basketballreference (http://bkref.com/tiny/pAy5d) KMart averaged four-five 12+ foot jumpers a game. Josh Smith has been above that for the last 3-4 years or so but before that he was below Martin's number of long(ish) jump shots a game. (http://bkref.com/tiny/P7GB1)