Concerns regarding Thomas

[Who]

No concerns. I think he is terrific as a sparkplug scorer off the bench.

If he were a starter, especially a long term starter, I would be unhappy. Too flawed.

But in the right role - 6th man type, 3rd guard, bench scorer - Thomas is a very good piece for this to have.

[slamtheking]

Throw in the fact that his size would make him an easy target for bigger PGs to post up, I truly wonder what the fascination is with him as a player.

I don't worry about post ups as much as poor length in rotations and contesting shots and passing angles. If you haven't seen him play much, think Ty Lawson's issues. Even small guards like Bradley can shoot right over him without an issue.

Plus he gives some pretty poor effort on that end too.

exactly.  for a team looking to improve its defense, he doesn't seem like a step in that direction.  a better-shooting PG, certainly.  a better-defending one, no.  A better-passing one, over what we currently have, I have to hope so but in comparison to what we started the season with (Rondo), a major drop off.

[KeepRondo]

Okay, so reading between the lines, lots of people seem to be concerned that Thomas will take playing time from smart.  And, he will.

Bottom line is, smart needs to be good enough. If he isn't, he isn't.

Eh you can be a great player and have your development stunted by being put into a minor role or just kept from handling the ball much, etc. etc.

I think Smart will have plenty of opportunities, but players don't succeed or fail entirely on their own talent. Fit, coaching, and enviroment matter a lot.

TP. This makes a lot more sense then a general statement that all talent will rise to the top.

[droopdog7]

Okay, so reading between the lines, lots of people seem to be concerned that Thomas will take playing time from smart.  And, he will.

Bottom line is, smart needs to be good enough. If he isn't, he isn't.

Eh you can be a great player and have your development stunted by being put into a minor role or just kept from handling the ball much, etc. etc.

I think Smart will have plenty of opportunities, but players don't succeed or fail entirely on their own talent. Fit, coaching, and enviroment matter a lot.

Disagree wholeheartedly.  "Great" players succeed no matter what.  As they say, cream rises to the top.  It's the specialist role player types that depend heavily on the situation. 

So what will smart be?  If he's the star many want him to be, then thomas is insignificant.  If he isn't, then I see the concern.

Great talents fail all the time, often until they find the right coach or situation. Enviroment and opportunity matter a lot, and when you're dealing with high stakes situations like the NBA you need to maximize a talent's chances.

It is hindsight silliness of saying that all great players succeed no matter what because you know they're great because you've seen them be great. So of course they'd have been great anywhere.

I can think of maybe a handful of "great" players that bounced around before becoming great.  Maybe Chauncey Billups.  Who else?

Every one else that bounced around and became good NBA were not great themselves, just in great situations.  So the question is, what do we think Marcus Smart will be?  A consistent all-star?  A fringe all-star?  Well then, he should get there regardless of Thomas. 

People act like NBA players only grow in games.  These guys are practicing all the time.  Coach sees these guys more than they would care to mention and they know exactly what they can andc can't do.  They also know exactly what kind of potential they have and can reasonably predict where they will go.

So if smart is that star player many are hoping for, the little bitty Isaiah Thomas should or cannot stand in his way.  Period, point-blank, end of story. 
 

[action781]

My concerns are that he looks for his own shot a bit too much (even at the expense of better players), and his defense is quite poor.

Well we can put that first concern to rest since we don't have any better players!

[esel1000]

My concerns are that he looks for his own shot a bit too much (even at the expense of better players), and his defense is quite poor.

Well we can put that first concern to rest since we don't have any better players!

That's pretty much how I see it, especially with Sully out the guy is going to average at least 20 ppg, where else is the offense coming from? Thomas is the only proven 20 ppg scorer on this roster especially with Thornton gone

[KeepRondo]

Okay, so reading between the lines, lots of people seem to be concerned that Thomas will take playing time from smart.  And, he will.

Bottom line is, smart needs to be good enough. If he isn't, he isn't.

Eh you can be a great player and have your development stunted by being put into a minor role or just kept from handling the ball much, etc. etc.

I think Smart will have plenty of opportunities, but players don't succeed or fail entirely on their own talent. Fit, coaching, and enviroment matter a lot.

Disagree wholeheartedly.  "Great" players succeed no matter what.  As they say, cream rises to the top.  It's the specialist role player types that depend heavily on the situation. 

So what will smart be?  If he's the star many want him to be, then thomas is insignificant.  If he isn't, then I see the concern.

Great talents fail all the time, often until they find the right coach or situation. Enviroment and opportunity matter a lot, and when you're dealing with high stakes situations like the NBA you need to maximize a talent's chances.

It is hindsight silliness of saying that all great players succeed no matter what because you know they're great because you've seen them be great. So of course they'd have been great anywhere.

I can think of maybe a handful of "great" players that bounced around before becoming great.  Maybe Chauncey Billups.  Who else?

Every one else that bounced around and became good NBA were not great themselves, just in great situations.  So the question is, what do we think Marcus Smart will be?  A consistent all-star?  A fringe all-star?  Well then, he should get there regardless of Thomas. 

People act like NBA players only grow in games.  These guys are practicing all the time.  Coach sees these guys more than they would care to mention and they know exactly what they can andc can't do.  They also know exactly what kind of potential they have and can reasonably predict where they will go.

So if smart is that star player many are hoping for, the little bitty Isaiah Thomas should or cannot stand in his way.  Period, point-blank, end of story.

You watch much NBA?

Because a lot of people told Hassan Whiteside that his story had ended also.

[droopdog7]

Okay, so reading between the lines, lots of people seem to be concerned that Thomas will take playing time from smart.  And, he will.

Bottom line is, smart needs to be good enough. If he isn't, he isn't.

Eh you can be a great player and have your development stunted by being put into a minor role or just kept from handling the ball much, etc. etc.

I think Smart will have plenty of opportunities, but players don't succeed or fail entirely on their own talent. Fit, coaching, and enviroment matter a lot.

Disagree wholeheartedly.  "Great" players succeed no matter what.  As they say, cream rises to the top.  It's the specialist role player types that depend heavily on the situation. 

So what will smart be?  If he's the star many want him to be, then thomas is insignificant.  If he isn't, then I see the concern.

Great talents fail all the time, often until they find the right coach or situation. Enviroment and opportunity matter a lot, and when you're dealing with high stakes situations like the NBA you need to maximize a talent's chances.

It is hindsight silliness of saying that all great players succeed no matter what because you know they're great because you've seen them be great. So of course they'd have been great anywhere.

I can think of maybe a handful of "great" players that bounced around before becoming great.  Maybe Chauncey Billups.  Who else?

Every one else that bounced around and became good NBA were not great themselves, just in great situations.  So the question is, what do we think Marcus Smart will be?  A consistent all-star?  A fringe all-star?  Well then, he should get there regardless of Thomas. 

People act like NBA players only grow in games.  These guys are practicing all the time.  Coach sees these guys more than they would care to mention and they know exactly what they can andc can't do.  They also know exactly what kind of potential they have and can reasonably predict where they will go.

So if smart is that star player many are hoping for, the little bitty Isaiah Thomas should or cannot stand in his way.  Period, point-blank, end of story.

You watch much NBA?

Because a lot of people told Hassan Whiteside that his story had ended also.

Hassan Whiteside is not a great player; he's a role player with half a season under his belt.  Is that what you expect of smart?

[Jonny CC]

Okay, so reading between the lines, lots of people seem to be concerned that Thomas will take playing time from smart.  And, he will.

Bottom line is, smart needs to be good enough. If he isn't, he isn't.

Eh you can be a great player and have your development stunted by being put into a minor role or just kept from handling the ball much, etc. etc.

I think Smart will have plenty of opportunities, but players don't succeed or fail entirely on their own talent. Fit, coaching, and enviroment matter a lot.

Disagree wholeheartedly.  "Great" players succeed no matter what.  As they say, cream rises to the top.  It's the specialist role player types that depend heavily on the situation. 

So what will smart be?  If he's the star many want him to be, then thomas is insignificant.  If he isn't, then I see the concern.

Great talents fail all the time, often until they find the right coach or situation. Enviroment and opportunity matter a lot, and when you're dealing with high stakes situations like the NBA you need to maximize a talent's chances.

It is hindsight silliness of saying that all great players succeed no matter what because you know they're great because you've seen them be great. So of course they'd have been great anywhere.

I can think of maybe a handful of "great" players that bounced around before becoming great.  Maybe Chauncey Billups.  Who else?

Every one else that bounced around and became good NBA were not great themselves, just in great situations.  So the question is, what do we think Marcus Smart will be?  A consistent all-star?  A fringe all-star?  Well then, he should get there regardless of Thomas. 

People act like NBA players only grow in games.  These guys are practicing all the time.  Coach sees these guys more than they would care to mention and they know exactly what they can andc can't do.  They also know exactly what kind of potential they have and can reasonably predict where they will go.

So if smart is that star player many are hoping for, the little bitty Isaiah Thomas should or cannot stand in his way.  Period, point-blank, end of story.

You watch much NBA?
Because a lot of people told Hassan Whiteside that his story had ended also.

It's Friday...lighten up. 
 

[ssspence]

No concerns. I think he is terrific as a sparkplug scorer off the bench.

If he were a starter, especially a long term starter, I would be unhappy. Too flawed.

But in the right role - 6th man type, 3rd guard, bench scorer - Thomas is a very good piece for this to have.

I don't think he agrees with you. That's my concern.

[Who]

No concerns. I think he is terrific as a sparkplug scorer off the bench.

If he were a starter, especially a long term starter, I would be unhappy. Too flawed.

But in the right role - 6th man type, 3rd guard, bench scorer - Thomas is a very good piece for this to have.

I don't think he agrees with you. That's my concern.

I think Thomas will have plenty of minutes from a bench role = 27-32mpg ... because the team needs his offense. His scoring, his shooting, his one-on-one play, the dribble drive threat he provides and his playmaking. He'll be getting starter's minutes from the bench role and finishing games a lot of time so I do not think a bench role will be a problem for him here.

However, as the team's talent improves, say Marcus Smart establishing himself as an above average starting PG and a new starting SG replaces Avery Bradley, then I could see Thomas becoming a problem further down the line.

If that happens, just dump him. He'll be easy to trade.

[KeepRondo]

Okay, so reading between the lines, lots of people seem to be concerned that Thomas will take playing time from smart.  And, he will.

Bottom line is, smart needs to be good enough. If he isn't, he isn't.

Eh you can be a great player and have your development stunted by being put into a minor role or just kept from handling the ball much, etc. etc.

I think Smart will have plenty of opportunities, but players don't succeed or fail entirely on their own talent. Fit, coaching, and enviroment matter a lot.

Disagree wholeheartedly.  "Great" players succeed no matter what.  As they say, cream rises to the top.  It's the specialist role player types that depend heavily on the situation. 

So what will smart be?  If he's the star many want him to be, then thomas is insignificant.  If he isn't, then I see the concern.

Great talents fail all the time, often until they find the right coach or situation. Enviroment and opportunity matter a lot, and when you're dealing with high stakes situations like the NBA you need to maximize a talent's chances.

It is hindsight silliness of saying that all great players succeed no matter what because you know they're great because you've seen them be great. So of course they'd have been great anywhere.

I can think of maybe a handful of "great" players that bounced around before becoming great.  Maybe Chauncey Billups.  Who else?

Every one else that bounced around and became good NBA were not great themselves, just in great situations.  So the question is, what do we think Marcus Smart will be?  A consistent all-star?  A fringe all-star?  Well then, he should get there regardless of Thomas. 

People act like NBA players only grow in games.  These guys are practicing all the time.  Coach sees these guys more than they would care to mention and they know exactly what they can andc can't do.  They also know exactly what kind of potential they have and can reasonably predict where they will go.

So if smart is that star player many are hoping for, the little bitty Isaiah Thomas should or cannot stand in his way.  Period, point-blank, end of story.

You watch much NBA?
Because a lot of people told Hassan Whiteside that his story had ended also.

It's Friday...lighten up. 
 

I just thought it was funny how he said end of story. I figured I would continue the story so he could have a brain seizure again. 

[sed522002]

?@foxsports910

.@Suns GM Ryan McDonough: "Sometimes players get a little selfish and worry more about I, My and Me than We, Ours and Us.

He could be talking about Dragic or IT, or both.

[KeepRondo]

Okay, so reading between the lines, lots of people seem to be concerned that Thomas will take playing time from smart.  And, he will.

Bottom line is, smart needs to be good enough. If he isn't, he isn't.

Eh you can be a great player and have your development stunted by being put into a minor role or just kept from handling the ball much, etc. etc.

I think Smart will have plenty of opportunities, but players don't succeed or fail entirely on their own talent. Fit, coaching, and enviroment matter a lot.

Disagree wholeheartedly.  "Great" players succeed no matter what.  As they say, cream rises to the top.  It's the specialist role player types that depend heavily on the situation. 

So what will smart be?  If he's the star many want him to be, then thomas is insignificant.  If he isn't, then I see the concern.

Great talents fail all the time, often until they find the right coach or situation. Enviroment and opportunity matter a lot, and when you're dealing with high stakes situations like the NBA you need to maximize a talent's chances.

It is hindsight silliness of saying that all great players succeed no matter what because you know they're great because you've seen them be great. So of course they'd have been great anywhere.

I can think of maybe a handful of "great" players that bounced around before becoming great.  Maybe Chauncey Billups.  Who else?

Every one else that bounced around and became good NBA were not great themselves, just in great situations.  So the question is, what do we think Marcus Smart will be?  A consistent all-star?  A fringe all-star?  Well then, he should get there regardless of Thomas. 

People act like NBA players only grow in games.  These guys are practicing all the time.  Coach sees these guys more than they would care to mention and they know exactly what they can andc can't do.  They also know exactly what kind of potential they have and can reasonably predict where they will go.

So if smart is that star player many are hoping for, the little bitty Isaiah Thomas should or cannot stand in his way.  Period, point-blank, end of story.

You watch much NBA?

Because a lot of people told Hassan Whiteside that his story had ended also.

Hassan Whiteside is not a great player; he's a role player with half a season under his belt.  Is that what you expect of smart?

Steve Nash was going to be a very good player but went on to be a two time MVP and top 50 all time player. All because he switched systems and became the focal point.

You want to say every player is predestined for greatness no matter what their situation is. That seems pretty narrow minded.

[droopdog7]

Okay, so reading between the lines, lots of people seem to be concerned that Thomas will take playing time from smart.  And, he will.

Bottom line is, smart needs to be good enough. If he isn't, he isn't.

Eh you can be a great player and have your development stunted by being put into a minor role or just kept from handling the ball much, etc. etc.

I think Smart will have plenty of opportunities, but players don't succeed or fail entirely on their own talent. Fit, coaching, and enviroment matter a lot.

Disagree wholeheartedly.  "Great" players succeed no matter what.  As they say, cream rises to the top.  It's the specialist role player types that depend heavily on the situation. 

So what will smart be?  If he's the star many want him to be, then thomas is insignificant.  If he isn't, then I see the concern.

Great talents fail all the time, often until they find the right coach or situation. Enviroment and opportunity matter a lot, and when you're dealing with high stakes situations like the NBA you need to maximize a talent's chances.

It is hindsight silliness of saying that all great players succeed no matter what because you know they're great because you've seen them be great. So of course they'd have been great anywhere.

I can think of maybe a handful of "great" players that bounced around before becoming great.  Maybe Chauncey Billups.  Who else?

Every one else that bounced around and became good NBA were not great themselves, just in great situations.  So the question is, what do we think Marcus Smart will be?  A consistent all-star?  A fringe all-star?  Well then, he should get there regardless of Thomas. 

People act like NBA players only grow in games.  These guys are practicing all the time.  Coach sees these guys more than they would care to mention and they know exactly what they can andc can't do.  They also know exactly what kind of potential they have and can reasonably predict where they will go.

So if smart is that star player many are hoping for, the little bitty Isaiah Thomas should or cannot stand in his way.  Period, point-blank, end of story.

You watch much NBA?

Because a lot of people told Hassan Whiteside that his story had ended also.

Hassan Whiteside is not a great player; he's a role player with half a season under his belt.  Is that what you expect of smart?

Steve Nash was going to be a very good player but went on to be a two time MVP and top 50 all time player. All because he switched systems and became the focal point.

You want to say every player is predestined for greatness no matter what their situation is. That seems pretty narrow minded.

Okay, so we've come up with a grand total of two players so far.