Yes or No? Marcus Smart Our Next Superstar?

[celtics2030]

I think I can honestly say that the only evidence I've ever heard that smart might be a good offensive player one day is based on a wing and a prayer.  Rarely if ever any solid evidence.

So I'm not surprised when posters resort to misdirection when defending smart.  I mean, what else do they have to lean on?

The evidence for Smart becoming a good offensive player is that he was one against older kids in college, he extremely strong, and he is a good athlete based on every metric we have and based on being able to match up athletically with a variety of other NBA athletes.

The evidence against him becoming a good offensive player is that you watched him and didn't like him.

Your evidence is trash though. This is not even attacking a poster. Your evidence just lacks any type of solid facts that say Marcus will be anything more than a role player at best.

[celtics2030]

I think I can honestly say that the only evidence I've ever heard that smart might be a good offensive player one day is based on a wing and a prayer.  Rarely if ever any solid evidence.

So I'm not surprised when posters resort to misdirection when defending smart.  I mean, what else do they have to lean on?

The evidence for Smart becoming a good offensive player is that he was one against older kids in college, he extremely strong, and he is a good athlete based on every metric we have and based on being able to match up athletically with a variety of other NBA athletes.

The evidence against him becoming a good offensive player is that you watched him and didn't like him.

The evidence backing him becoming a good offensive player is that you watch him and are in denial. You also will bring up the  "He does other things" as the excuse for his horrible offense. Don't worry those excuses will come soon.

[alewilliam789]

I think I can honestly say that the only evidence I've ever heard that smart might be a good offensive player one day is based on a wing and a prayer.  Rarely if ever any solid evidence.

So I'm not surprised when posters resort to misdirection when defending smart.  I mean, what else do they have to lean on?

The evidence for Smart becoming a good offensive player is that he was one against older kids in college, he extremely strong, and he is a good athlete based on every metric we have and based on being able to match up athletically with a variety of other NBA athletes.

The evidence against him becoming a good offensive player is that you watched him and didn't like him.

When has being strong or even a good athlete meant that a player will become a good offensive player?? Wesley Johnson has not become a good offensive player even though he is an elite athlete. Gerald Green is not a good offensive player yet he is an elite athlete. The list goes on and on. If you're only point in a debate about Marcus Smart's offensive potential relies solely on the basis of his athleticism then it is clear you have put together a terrible argument.

[celtics2030]

I think I can honestly say that the only evidence I've ever heard that smart might be a good offensive player one day is based on a wing and a prayer.  Rarely if ever any solid evidence.

So I'm not surprised when posters resort to misdirection when defending smart.  I mean, what else do they have to lean on?

The evidence for Smart becoming a good offensive player is that he was one against older kids in college, he extremely strong, and he is a good athlete based on every metric we have and based on being able to match up athletically with a variety of other NBA athletes.

The evidence against him becoming a good offensive player is that you watched him and didn't like him.

When has being strong or even a good athlete meant that a player will become a good offensive player?? Wesley Johnson has not become a good offensive player even though he is an elite athlete. Gerald Green is not a good offensive player yet he is an elite athlete. The list goes on and on. If you're only point in a debate about Marcus Smart's offensive potential relies solely on the basis of his athleticism then it is clear you have put together a terrible argument.

The funny thing is Marcus isn't a great athlete.

[littleteapot]

When has being strong or even a good athlete meant that a player will become a good offensive player?? Wesley Johnson has not become a good offensive player even though he is an elite athlete. Gerald Green is not a good offensive player yet he is an elite athlete. The list goes on and on. If you're only point in a debate about Marcus Smart's offensive potential relies solely on the basis of his athleticism then it is clear you have put together a terrible argument.

I think he also has excellent court vision and instincts and showed a ton of improvement over his rookie year, but I was responding to a ridiculous point that pro-Smart people weren't providing "evidence."

You can find a bust of every shape and size but that doesn't mean that your physical profile has no impact on your offensive potential.

[Celtics4ever]

Yes, he's strong but I saw no evidence yesterday, and have seen very little evidence throughout the nba that it will be a huge advantage.  With the explosiveness or the basketball skills, strength will only take you so far.

I dunno a stronger guy always has an edge on a weaker guy in any sport all other things being equal.   Guys like Bird and like were strong for their size.   A lot of basketball players have a wiry strength to them.  Also, guys like Wilt, Artis Gilmore, Shaq, the Mailman and Ben Wallace were all very strong and did quite well so it has its advantages.   Basketball also has a finesse side where thin guys like Iceman and Reggie Miller, can thrive though.   But I would wager even those guys are stronger than you think.

Note how it takes several men to hold him back

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oO4Fnv_5VIc

Paul is a ready strong guy while he was here.   It must help quite a bit because each team has dedicated staff for it.   Now they are not looking for a power lifting build or bodybuilder but lean explosive strength.

[droopdog7]

Yes, he's strong but I saw no evidence yesterday, and have seen very little evidence throughout the nba that it will be a huge advantage.  With the explosiveness or the basketball skills, strength will only take you so far.

I dunno a stronger guy always has an edge on a weaker guy in any sport all other things being equal.   Guys like Bird and like were strong for their size.   A lot of basketball players have a wiry strength to them.  Also, guys like Wilt, Artis Gilmore, Shaq, the Mailman and Ben Wallace were all very strong and did quite well so it has its advantages.   Basketball also has a finesse side where thin guys like Iceman and Reggie Miller, can thrive though.   But I would wager even those guys are stronger than you think.

Note how it takes several men to hold him back

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oO4Fnv_5VIc

Paul is a ready strong guy while he was here.   It must help quite a bit because each team has dedicated staff for it.   Now they are not looking for a power lifting build or bodybuilder but lean explosive strength.

Not saying that strength isn't a good thing.  All things being equal, bigger and stronger is obviously better.  But smart has to combine that strength with something else to really take advantage.  Lot of the guys you mentioned were bigs or also great athletes.  Others combine strength with skill (shooting, handle or both).

Earlier in this thread people compared smart to a middle linebacker.  At the moment, unfortunately, I think that may be more accurate that we'd like; a middle linebacker playing PG.

Hyperbole?  Sure, but you get the point.

[littleteapot]

I think I can honestly say that the only evidence I've ever heard that smart might be a good offensive player one day is based on a wing and a prayer.  Rarely if ever any solid evidence.

So I'm not surprised when posters resort to misdirection when defending smart.  I mean, what else do they have to lean on?

The evidence for Smart becoming a good offensive player is that he was one against older kids in college, he extremely strong, and he is a good athlete based on every metric we have and based on being able to match up athletically with a variety of other NBA athletes.

The evidence against him becoming a good offensive player is that you watched him and didn't like him.

Your evidence is trash though. This is not even attacking a poster. Your evidence just lacks any type of solid facts that say Marcus will be anything more than a role player at best.

Dude we're talking about a player's future potential. If there were "solid facts" about what these guys will be in 5 years, Danny Ainge wouldn't be making millions of dollars. I just have evidence that he is a superior athlete in the NBA. Am I wrong? Does he not match up well physically to the other guards in the NBA? Did he find a long-lost cousin to work out at the combine for him?

[CelticsJG]

I think I can honestly say that the only evidence I've ever heard that smart might be a good offensive player one day is based on a wing and a prayer.  Rarely if ever any solid evidence.

So I'm not surprised when posters resort to misdirection when defending smart.  I mean, what else do they have to lean on?

The evidence for Smart becoming a good offensive player is that he was one against older kids in college, he extremely strong, and he is a good athlete based on every metric we have and based on being able to match up athletically with a variety of other NBA athletes.

The evidence against him becoming a good offensive player is that you watched him and didn't like him.

College scoring means nothing.  Take the leading scorer in college every year going back to whenever you like and I'm betting the large large majority never make it in the nba.  Players like Kurt rambis were great college scorers.

In terms of athleticism, I just don't see it.  Can't get off the ground without gathering on two feet.  Not especially quick and has trouble driving by his man.  His handle average and his shot is below average.  Let's see, is that enough evidence?

Yes, he's strong but I saw no evidence yesterday, and have seen very little evidence throughout the nba that it will be a huge advantage.  With the explosiveness or the basketball skills, strength will only take you so far.

3 great offensive games + 1 bad offensive game = he'll never be a good offensive player. Hmmm, that sounds like sound logic, eh.

I don't believe I've mentioned anything at all about stats.  Having said that, I thought his first game was average.

Anyway, it isn't about stats it's about skills.  we already know he isn't a great shooter.
 He's streaky at best.  We already he has an average handle.  We already know he has trouble finishing.  We already know he is a tweener right now.

I am with Droopdog. Smart doesnt excel at anything on the offensive end. His slow bulldog driving skills not going to translate against guards who are just as strong or more agile. If he ever make it to the rim his finishing skills are terrible. Smart offensive skills set are terrible. He is a chucker. A 3&D guy with a consistent D.

[twistedrico]

All Defensive team eventually a few all-star appearances... 

[crimson_stallion]

No, I don't think he'll be a superstar.

But I think he'll be a (maybe even THE) core piece we build around.

I think that one day he may be just as important to our team as KG was to us in 2008-2010.  The verbal and emotional leader of the team, and the passion/heart/sole that drives it.

I don't think he'll be a superstar, but I think he'll be as valuable as one.

[clover]

No.

[jdz101]

Nope

Sorry.

[biggs]

Yes, but as Dave Chapelle would say: "you won by default."