How can anyone think Marcus Smart is a good NBA basketball player?

[spikelovetheCelts]

Marcus has been one of the better players in the last 3 drafts taken near the top based on potential because of his defense. Drafts are a total crap shoot right now and Ainge took the right player.

THe OP is just barking. He has no bite.  He's like that old dog at the end of the street barking at nothing.

Smart has the drive the work ethic and natural talent to be an all star. He is an alpha dog leader. DA made the right choice and every game we continue seeing his growth.

[max215]

I think he is an impactful enough defensive player to qualify as a "good NBA player," but obviously he has to improve a ton on the offensive end to ever be very good/great.

[max215]

Just one more thing I want to point out to everybody here.

These are the rookie year "Real Plus Minus" stats for every player who has been drafted top 10 for the past three seasons (when Real Plus Minus first started being tracked)

2013
Anthony Bennett: -5.25
Victor Oladipo: -0.56
Otto Porter: -3.49
Cody Zeller: -2.25
Alex Len: -3.25
Ben McLemore: -5.49
Kentavious Caldwell-Pope: -0.82
Trey Burke: -1.23
CJ McCollum: -0.93


2014
Nerlens Noel: -1.5 (listed him here, as he did not play in 2013/14)
Andrew Wiggins: -1.66
Jabari Parker: -4.34
Joel Embiid:  DNP, no stats
Aaron Gordon: -2.52
Dante Exum: -1.77
Marcus Smart: +2.22
Nik Stauskas: -4.33
Noah Vonleh: -2.81
Elfrid Payton: +2.10


2015
Julius Randle: -3.15 (listed here, as he only played one game in 2014/15)
Karl Anthony Towns: +0.35
D'Angelo Russell: -2.70
Jahlil Okafor: -5.85
Kristaps Porzingis: +1.95
Mario Hezonja: -3.78
Willie Cauley Stein: +0.68
Emmanuel Mudiay:  -5.98
Stanley Johnson: -3.60
Frank Kaminsky: -0.92
Justise Winslow: -3.47


I have highlighted in bold all of the players who actually made their team better, as rookies, while they were on the court.  As you can see, it's a very short list.

It's -2.23 this season for Smart.

He's been injured virtually all year. We can certainly look into hitting the panic button if that's his RPM at the end of the year though.

[Eja117]

I don't think Rondo was a bad shooter per se, but I don't think he was a good one either. I don't think Smart is.

If people are going to say Smart is a bad shooter but Rondo is/was a good one....I sorta think being able to hit a free throw is a prerequisite of being considered a good shooter, let alone a three pointer. Consistently, not here and there.

Larry Bird and Steph Curry. Great shooters. Rondo....not in the same line, sentence, paragraph, page, book, reading room, or same library as those guys shooting wise.  Same language and to be found on Amazon.com perhaps.

[KeepRondo]

I don't think Rondo was a bad shooter per se, but I don't think he was a good one either. I don't think Smart is.

If people are going to say Smart is a bad shooter but Rondo is/was a good one....I sorta think being able to hit a free throw is a prerequisite of being considered a good shooter, let alone a three pointer. Consistently, not here and there.

Larry Bird and Steph Curry. Great shooters. Rondo....not in the same line, sentence, paragraph, page, book, reading room, or same library as those guys shooting wise.  Same language and to be found on Amazon.com perhaps.

Rondo brings a lot more on offense other than scoring. So it's a mistake to say we must criticize both if we criticize Smart's shooting. Second, Rondo has always maintained an adequate field goal percentage. Pretty much a 13 percentage point difference between the two.

[Eja117]

I don't think Rondo was a bad shooter per se, but I don't think he was a good one either. I don't think Smart is.

If people are going to say Smart is a bad shooter but Rondo is/was a good one....I sorta think being able to hit a free throw is a prerequisite of being considered a good shooter, let alone a three pointer. Consistently, not here and there.

Larry Bird and Steph Curry. Great shooters. Rondo....not in the same line, sentence, paragraph, page, book, reading room, or same library as those guys shooting wise.  Same language and to be found on Amazon.com perhaps.

Rondo brings a lot more on offense other than scoring. So it's a mistake to say we must criticize both if we criticize Smart's shooting. Second, Rondo has always maintained an adequate field goal percentage. Pretty much a 13 percentage point difference between the two.

I think it's pretty clear at this point who the better offensive and defensive players are/were

[Rosco917]

Why this sensitivity for Rondo continues I have no idea. It's like a wound that some will not let heal, it gets torn open every few days on this forum. 

Get over it, he's gone. Smart had nothing to do with the trading of Rondo. If it bothers you that the team played better when he was gone, you must be taking great delight in the way the C's are currently playing.

Downing Smart every chance you can, because you miss your boy, is childish.

[Eja117]

Why this sensitivity for Rondo continues I have no idea. It's like a wound that some will not let heal, it gets torn open every few days on this forum. 

Get over it, he's gone. Smart had nothing to do with the trading of Rondo. If it bothers you that the team played better when he was gone, you must be taking great delight in the way the C's are currently playing.

Downing Smart every chance you can, because you miss your boy, is childish.

It has nothing to do with any of that. People just need to have the same standards. Neither player should be the hero or whipping boy more than the other when they play similarly.

[KeepRondo]

Why this sensitivity for Rondo continues I have no idea. It's like a wound that some will not let heal, it gets torn open every few days on this forum. 

Get over it, he's gone. Smart had nothing to do with the trading of Rondo. If it bothers you that the team played better when he was gone, you must be taking great delight in the way the C's are currently playing.

Downing Smart every chance you can, because you miss your boy, is childish.

It has nothing to do with any of that. People just need to have the same standards. Neither player should be the hero or whipping boy more than the other when they play similarly.

I'm not understanding your point. It kind of sounds like you are saying because I don't critique Rondo, a guy no longer on the team, I can't criticize Smart? Did I get that correct?

[KeepRondo]

Why this sensitivity for Rondo continues I have no idea. It's like a wound that some will not let heal, it gets torn open every few days on this forum. 

Get over it, he's gone. Smart had nothing to do with the trading of Rondo. If it bothers you that the team played better when he was gone, you must be taking great delight in the way the C's are currently playing.

Downing Smart every chance you can, because you miss your boy, is childish.

Smart sucking has nothing to do with Rondo. 

[crimson_stallion]

Just one more thing I want to point out to everybody here.

These are the rookie year "Real Plus Minus" stats for every player who has been drafted top 10 for the past three seasons (when Real Plus Minus first started being tracked)

2013
Anthony Bennett: -5.25
Victor Oladipo: -0.56
Otto Porter: -3.49
Cody Zeller: -2.25
Alex Len: -3.25
Ben McLemore: -5.49
Kentavious Caldwell-Pope: -0.82
Trey Burke: -1.23
CJ McCollum: -0.93


2014
Nerlens Noel: -1.5 (listed him here, as he did not play in 2013/14)
Andrew Wiggins: -1.66
Jabari Parker: -4.34
Joel Embiid:  DNP, no stats
Aaron Gordon: -2.52
Dante Exum: -1.77
Marcus Smart: +2.22
Nik Stauskas: -4.33
Noah Vonleh: -2.81
Elfrid Payton: +2.10


2015
Julius Randle: -3.15 (listed here, as he only played one game in 2014/15)
Karl Anthony Towns: +0.35
D'Angelo Russell: -2.70
Jahlil Okafor: -5.85
Kristaps Porzingis: +1.95
Mario Hezonja: -3.78
Willie Cauley Stein: +0.68
Emmanuel Mudiay:  -5.98
Stanley Johnson: -3.60
Frank Kaminsky: -0.92
Justise Winslow: -3.47


I have highlighted in bold all of the players who actually made their team better, as rookies, while they were on the court.  As you can see, it's a very short list.

It's -2.23 this season for Smart.

This is true, and he's clearly played worse this season.

However that still doesn't take away from the fact that he had the highest first-year RPM of any rookie of the past three years, while also being one of the only rookies on that list who started on a Playoff team.

I did check his RPM earlier in the season (before he got injured) and it was about the same general range as it was last year (around + 1.9 or so) so it's probably safe to conclude the injury affected his numbers.

Still, can't use injury as an excuse forever, so we'll see what happens as the season goes on.

 

[crimson_stallion]

I guess you enjoy wasting your time by the looks of that last post.

The entire premise of your attack is that you don't consider 47.5 percent close to 50 percent. So much so that you try to slam me for it.

It was a fail on your part dude. Move on. 

You are just looking worse the more this goes on.

Also Rondo avg 47.3 percent shooting on Celtics for his career. It's always fun when you're told you are wrong and the person telling you that couldn't be more wrong about it.

Neither 47.5% nor 47.3% is "nearly 50%".

It's a good percentage, especially for a guard.  I never disputed that.  But saying it is "near 50%" is silly.

The majority of players in the NBA average somewhere between 40% and 50% from the field, with the average being around 45%. 

If 45% is an average FG% then it's safe to say that 47.5% is a very good and 50% is great.  There's a distinct difference.

Given that the vast majority of players shoot between 40% and 50%, the difference between 47.5% and 50% is significant.

I'll give you 49% and I'll even give you 48% (and that's pushing it) but once you get down into the 47% range, no. 

In fact just to prove my point, Rondo has played a total of 527 games as a Celtic over 9 seasons, in which he has managed 2402 FGM on 5083 FGA, for a total FG% of 47%.

For him to push that percentage up from 47% to 50% he would have have to have made approximately 150 extra field goals. 

Over that 9 year stretch Rondo on average took roughly 10 two point shots for every 1 three point shot, so it's save to assume he would that 150 field goals would be roughly 135 2PT shots and 15 3PT shots. 

That adds up to about 315 extra points scored over 9 seasons.  Enough to increase his entire scoring average by 0.6 PPG for that entire 9 year stretch.

IMHO that is significant. Not a huge different, but significant.

Based on the above, I would say that 48.5% is actually 'close enough' to 50% that it can be more or less considered insignificant.  48% is a stretch - borderline.   

Anyway your username alone is a pretty obvious indicator of your personal bias, just FYI.

[Monkhouse]

I see Draymond Green in the same exact way as I see Smart.

Draymond Green has the intangibles, the leadership, and the ability to just bring people together with his energy and hustle. I see that in the same way in Smart, when he plays defense, and the way he hustles on the boards.

[Monkhouse]

Smart is a fierce competitor. He also works hard, and has a determined work ethic. Its not a surprise to suddenly or possibly see his numbers jump up in a few years, although I'm a little worried about his injuries.

Also, how can you say he sucks after watching this game?!?

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

Against a good defensive team in OKC. They may have been missing Durant, but Westbrook/Ibaka/Adams/Kanter is still a darn good team.

I guarantee more than half of the GM's would salivate at the chance to have Smart on their team.

[crimson_stallion]

To be honest, I think most people seem to sit one one of two extreme ends of the fence with Smart:

1) Smart sucks and is a bum
2) Smart is a beast and is going to be a star

Personally, I think the realistic reality probably lies somewhere in the middle.  I'm not sure he'll ever be good enough to be considered a star, but I think he'll be a very good player none the less.

I also think he'll be a guy who wins games with intangibles, rather than the type who impresses on the box score.  I think he's more likely to be the 15/5/5 guy that wins games with his hustle and clutch play, rather than the guy who puts up all star numbers on a nightly basis. 

A mini-Draymond Green is a good comparison.