Author Topic: Is Smart really the future?  (Read 7659 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Is Smart really the future?
« Reply #30 on: January 07, 2016, 01:03:14 PM »

Offline droopdog7

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7026
  • Tommy Points: 468
Yes. Good passing, defense, effort, size, teammate, leader, and still young. He is Kawhi at PG with development and of course if they actually let him be the full time PG.
Gotta be earned.  Kid is not a natural PG and who knows if he will ever get there..

Re: Is Smart really the future?
« Reply #31 on: January 07, 2016, 01:11:42 PM »

Offline jambr380

  • K.C. Jones
  • *************
  • Posts: 13842
  • Tommy Points: 2074
  • Sometimes there's no sane reason for optimism
I love Smart and would love to see him turn into a star in green, but Crowder's emergence has made that less of a necessity and more of a luxury if that happens. If Smart can be the centerpiece of a trade that brings in a 'star', I have to imagine Danny will jump at that opportunity.

Re: Is Smart really the future?
« Reply #32 on: January 07, 2016, 01:22:45 PM »

Offline hwangjini_1

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18456
  • Tommy Points: 2789
  • bammokja
do you mean smart is THE future for the celtics team? or do you mean, he is one important part of the future?

it makes a difference.
I believe Gandhi is the only person who knew about real democracy — not democracy as the right to go and buy what you want, but democracy as the responsibility to be accountable to everyone around you. Democracy begins with freedom from hunger, freedom from unemployment, freedom from fear, and freedom from hatred.
- Vandana Shiva

Re: Is Smart really the future?
« Reply #33 on: January 07, 2016, 01:24:24 PM »

Offline footey

  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16039
  • Tommy Points: 1837
What if Ainge is forced to decide between Smart and moving up to get Simmons though or a player like that?

I would keep smart and tell them to keep simmons if it came down to that and take our picks and find someone else. I bet there are people who wouldn't though and would trade Smart if it came down to that.

That is a hypothetical that has a zero chance of occurring.  No team with the number 1 pick is going to trade down a single spot and forfeit the chance to draft Simmons.  He is an elite no. 1 pick that won't be traded. 

Re: Is Smart really the future?
« Reply #34 on: January 07, 2016, 02:52:52 PM »

Offline spikelovetheCelts

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1616
  • Tommy Points: 113
  • Peace it's a board. We all will never agree.
What if Ainge is forced to decide between Smart and moving up to get Simmons though or a player like that?

I would keep smart and tell them to keep simmons if it came down to that and take our picks and find someone else. I bet there are people who wouldn't though and would trade Smart if it came down to that.

That is a hypothetical that has a zero chance of occurring.  No team with the number 1 pick is going to trade down a single spot and forfeit the chance to draft Simmons.  He is an elite no. 1 pick that won't be traded.
Never say never. If we have the second pick someone may do Ingram, Smart and another Nets pick for Simmons.
"People look at players, watch them dribble between their legs and they say, 'There's a superstar.'  Well John Havlicek is a superstar, and most of the others are figments of writers' imagination."
--Jerry West, on John Havlicek

Re: Is Smart really the future?
« Reply #35 on: January 08, 2016, 02:53:51 PM »

Offline JHTruth

  • NCE
  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2297
  • Tommy Points: 111
Smart is the future until trading him brings in a better piece for the future. These things don't happen in a vacuum. Kareem was traded. Shaq was traded. No one is above getting moved in this league, especially with Danny at the helm.

We're talking about the same guy who traded KG, PP, Walker, and Rondo without blinking.

Smart is a good player but he's not like a superstar or anything..

Re: Is Smart really the future?
« Reply #36 on: January 08, 2016, 04:51:48 PM »

Offline walker834

  • NCE
  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5240
  • Tommy Points: 238
Danny traded KG and Pierce when they were old and no longer conducive to winning here.  Their window had closed. Ray had left.  They were past their window of being championship cornerstone players. They were making max money and were not performing to that level.

The process of trading them was also an exhausting one.  Ainge didn't just trade them on a whim.

Re: Is Smart really the future?
« Reply #37 on: January 08, 2016, 04:59:14 PM »

Offline jpotter33

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 52059
  • Tommy Points: 3197
What if Ainge is forced to decide between Smart and moving up to get Simmons though or a player like that?

I would keep smart and tell them to keep simmons if it came down to that and take our picks and find someone else. I bet there are people who wouldn't though and would trade Smart if it came down to that.

That is a hypothetical that has a zero chance of occurring.  No team with the number 1 pick is going to trade down a single spot and forfeit the chance to draft Simmons.  He is an elite no. 1 pick that won't be traded.
Never say never. If we have the second pick someone may do Ingram, Smart and another Nets pick for Simmons.

Surely this is sarcasm, because this is the most lopsided trade based on "potential" that I've ever seen.
Recovering Joe Skeptic, but inching towards a relapse.

Re: Is Smart really the future?
« Reply #38 on: January 08, 2016, 07:39:32 PM »

Online Who

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 53577
  • Tommy Points: 2584
Not that worried about the inefficiency (FG%).

I am more worried by how little Smart has been able to get into the paint off the dribble (a) one-on-one or (b) in the pick and roll. And how that has limited the team's ability to draw help defenders and get opposing teams off balance (since dribble penetration is #1 in league nowadays for doing this).

I think a lot of Smart's FG% problems are down to shot-selection and are easy enough to improve. Needs to take less off the dribble 3s and more stand still 3s. That will make a huge difference to his FG% numbers.

I'd love to see Smart add an 18-22 footer off the PnR like Bradley has. Clearly struggles getting to the rim and engaging the big man defender ... but that pull up shot is often there for him. Good shot for him with his size and strength. He can clear space for himself because of that. I think this shot needs to be a priority for him so he can get some offense off the dribble consistently.

Re: Is Smart really the future?
« Reply #39 on: January 08, 2016, 08:00:09 PM »

Offline Chris22

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5081
  • Tommy Points: 460
Smart is a backup two guard.
His shooting is terrible.

Re: Is Smart really the future?
« Reply #40 on: January 08, 2016, 08:56:26 PM »

Offline DefenseWinsChamps

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6859
  • Tommy Points: 813
Baron Davis, Lance Stephenson, Kyle Lowry

Give the boy time to develop under CBS. Also, give the Celtics time to get a star so that Smart can play off of him.

Re: Is Smart really the future?
« Reply #41 on: January 08, 2016, 09:15:57 PM »

Offline Celtics4ever

  • NCE
  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20271
  • Tommy Points: 1342
Quote
Danny traded KG and Pierce when they were old and no longer conducive to winning here.  Their window had closed. Ray had left.  They were past their window of being championship cornerstone players. They were making max money and were not performing to that level.

The process of trading them was also an exhausting one.  Ainge didn't just trade them on a whim.

And the fruits of this trade are yet to come.

Re: Is Smart really the future?
« Reply #42 on: January 08, 2016, 09:20:12 PM »

Offline Eddie20

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8497
  • Tommy Points: 975
Quote
Danny traded KG and Pierce when they were old and no longer conducive to winning here.  Their window had closed. Ray had left.  They were past their window of being championship cornerstone players. They were making max money and were not performing to that level.

The process of trading them was also an exhausting one.  Ainge didn't just trade them on a whim.

And the fruits of this trade are yet to come.

Thomas was acquired via the 1st rd pick, which was received from Cleveland, along with Zeller, for the Pierce trade exception from the trade.

Re: Is Smart really the future?
« Reply #43 on: January 08, 2016, 09:53:16 PM »

Offline hwangjini_1

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18456
  • Tommy Points: 2789
  • bammokja
Smart Bradley is a backup two guard.
His shooting is terrible.
said so many celtics fans about avery bradley after his first season.

patience and let's wait and see whether or not smart develops a good shot. no need to reach a final verdict right now.
I believe Gandhi is the only person who knew about real democracy — not democracy as the right to go and buy what you want, but democracy as the responsibility to be accountable to everyone around you. Democracy begins with freedom from hunger, freedom from unemployment, freedom from fear, and freedom from hatred.
- Vandana Shiva

Re: Is Smart really the future?
« Reply #44 on: January 08, 2016, 09:58:46 PM »

Offline SCeltic34

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18233
  • Tommy Points: 2365
Not that worried about the inefficiency (FG%).

I am more worried by how little Smart has been able to get into the paint off the dribble (a) one-on-one or (b) in the pick and roll. And how that has limited the team's ability to draw help defenders and get opposing teams off balance (since dribble penetration is #1 in league nowadays for doing this).

I think a lot of Smart's FG% problems are down to shot-selection and are easy enough to improve. Needs to take less off the dribble 3s and more stand still 3s. That will make a huge difference to his FG% numbers.

I'd love to see Smart add an 18-22 footer off the PnR like Bradley has. Clearly struggles getting to the rim and engaging the big man defender ... but that pull up shot is often there for him. Good shot for him with his size and strength. He can clear space for himself because of that. I think this shot needs to be a priority for him so he can get some offense off the dribble consistently.

I agree that his efficiency is disappointingly low due to poor shot selection and the volume of 3's that he takes.  But I'm still worried about it, mainly because he hasn't been able to finish at the rim, even on strong drives where he makes it there.

The numbers don't show it, but Smart has improved offensively - not from a shooting standpoint, but his playmaking out of the PnR is vastly improved.  He's getting more adept at changing speeds, keeping his dribble, and making good pocket/kick-out passes at the right time.  We'd all love to see him go to the hoop more, but I think that will come with further experience.  I don't have much hope for him ever being a 1 on 1 type of player.

I like the idea of getting the ball the Smart in the post - not for the purpose of setting him up for a shot, but to get him in better position to make a play.  That extra step or two from the NBA perimeter - a few steps beyond the NBA 3 point line - really hurts a player like Smart who doesn't have an explosive first step nor a great top speed.  If we can get him closer to where he was at college, he'd be able to utilize his size, strength, and physicality more effectively, if he's willing to do so.  He hasn't done this so far which is really disappointing, seeing as how he was touted as a physical player in college in going to the hoop (he's obviously physical on the defensive end, so he lived up to that part).  I think he'd be more effective in a side PnR closer to the basket near the key as well rather than way out near the 3 point line.

Overall I love Smart.  I don't think he's the future, but I do think that he will be able to serve as a very important piece on a contending team.  His intangibles are off the charts.