Author Topic: Is Smart expendable?  (Read 11576 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Is Smart expendable?
« Reply #60 on: March 28, 2016, 06:16:36 PM »

Offline The Oracle

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1201
  • Tommy Points: 598
You would need to bring in an equally intense player. Smart is a leader. If you lose him the defensive drop off could be severe.

We aren't used to thinking of guards as being the most important defensive player on the team, but with the new rules where you get a foul for breathing on a guard it's pretty important.

Realistically if we bring in Hield I think Avery might be the expendable one. Especially if Hield can play defense.

Terry Rozier, RJ Hunter, and James Young are expendable ones right now. Not sure what you'd get for them.

Why is Smart a leader?  When Crowder (along with IT - the real leaders) went down Brad tried starting Smart and it did not work.  Turner while not as strong a defender as Smart is a more versatile defender-  being able to guard the 1, 2 & 3--  Smart cannot guard most 3's and is anything but a leader on offense.

Given his hero antics on offense I doubt that the rest of the team looks at him as a leader.
So you think a very young team just happened to become a great defensive team as soon as they drafted Smart and it has nothing to do with him? When you have a guy leaving it all out on the floor every single night, that is definitely leadership. He's a leader like Perk that way. Refusing to back down to anything ever is definitely leadership. We have seen tons of offensive players prove offense doesn't necessarily equate to leadership

The only Celtic who I have heard say that Marcus Smart is a leader is Marcus Smart.  We became a very good defensive team once Crowder came into the fold.  From what I have seen Brad uses Avery as the top on the ball, guard defender--not Marcus. Leaving it all out on the floor has to include making good decisions-- Marcus right now is Tony Allen, poor decisions and all -- nothing more.  I hope he is the Scarecrow and finds a brain but that definitely remains to be seen. 
As Evan Turner put it earlier this year.  Marcus Smart knocks the door down and he just walks through it.  Arguing that he doesn't have a huge impact defensively is nonsense.

Re: Is Smart expendable?
« Reply #61 on: March 28, 2016, 06:19:58 PM »

Offline Eja117

  • NCE
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19274
  • Tommy Points: 1254
You would need to bring in an equally intense player. Smart is a leader. If you lose him the defensive drop off could be severe.

We aren't used to thinking of guards as being the most important defensive player on the team, but with the new rules where you get a foul for breathing on a guard it's pretty important.

Realistically if we bring in Hield I think Avery might be the expendable one. Especially if Hield can play defense.

Terry Rozier, RJ Hunter, and James Young are expendable ones right now. Not sure what you'd get for them.

Why is Smart a leader?  When Crowder (along with IT - the real leaders) went down Brad tried starting Smart and it did not work.  Turner while not as strong a defender as Smart is a more versatile defender-  being able to guard the 1, 2 & 3--  Smart cannot guard most 3's and is anything but a leader on offense.

Given his hero antics on offense I doubt that the rest of the team looks at him as a leader.
So you think a very young team just happened to become a great defensive team as soon as they drafted Smart and it has nothing to do with him? When you have a guy leaving it all out on the floor every single night, that is definitely leadership. He's a leader like Perk that way. Refusing to back down to anything ever is definitely leadership. We have seen tons of offensive players prove offense doesn't necessarily equate to leadership

The only Celtic who I have heard say that Marcus Smart is a leader is Marcus Smart.  We became a very good defensive team once Crowder came into the fold.  From what I have seen Brad uses Avery as the top on the ball, guard defender--not Marcus. Leaving it all out on the floor has to include making good decisions-- Marcus right now is Tony Allen, poor decisions and all -- nothing more.  I hope he is the Scarecrow and finds a brain but that definitely remains to be seen.
Marcus is definitely the better defender and the best on the team.  He proved that when he pwned Harden. This is why Brad feels he can put him at small forward.

Re: Is Smart expendable?
« Reply #62 on: March 28, 2016, 07:46:15 PM »

Offline loco_91

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2087
  • Tommy Points: 145
Smart's value right now is probably as low as it's been. He's in a bad slump, and if Ainge is trying to trade him, what does that say to other GMs?

One player that we could sell high on would be IT. He's had a phenomenal year, so good that he could be a big part of a package for a superstar (together with the Nets pick). If we could do that, I'd be all for it.

Re: Is Smart expendable?
« Reply #63 on: March 28, 2016, 07:49:38 PM »

Offline loco_91

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2087
  • Tommy Points: 145
You would need to bring in an equally intense player. Smart is a leader. If you lose him the defensive drop off could be severe.

We aren't used to thinking of guards as being the most important defensive player on the team, but with the new rules where you get a foul for breathing on a guard it's pretty important.

Realistically if we bring in Hield I think Avery might be the expendable one. Especially if Hield can play defense.

Terry Rozier, RJ Hunter, and James Young are expendable ones right now. Not sure what you'd get for them.

Why is Smart a leader?  When Crowder (along with IT - the real leaders) went down Brad tried starting Smart and it did not work.  Turner while not as strong a defender as Smart is a more versatile defender-  being able to guard the 1, 2 & 3--  Smart cannot guard most 3's and is anything but a leader on offense.

Given his hero antics on offense I doubt that the rest of the team looks at him as a leader.
So you think a very young team just happened to become a great defensive team as soon as they drafted Smart and it has nothing to do with him? When you have a guy leaving it all out on the floor every single night, that is definitely leadership. He's a leader like Perk that way. Refusing to back down to anything ever is definitely leadership. We have seen tons of offensive players prove offense doesn't necessarily equate to leadership

The only Celtic who I have heard say that Marcus Smart is a leader is Marcus Smart.  We became a very good defensive team once Crowder came into the fold.  From what I have seen Brad uses Avery as the top on the ball, guard defender--not Marcus. Leaving it all out on the floor has to include making good decisions-- Marcus right now is Tony Allen, poor decisions and all -- nothing more.  I hope he is the Scarecrow and finds a brain but that definitely remains to be seen.
Marcus is definitely the better defender and the best on the team.  He proved that when he pwned Harden. This is why Brad feels he can put him at small forward.

AB is an extremely good on-ball defender, probably even better than Smart (especially against really quick PGs). Smart is better overall, though. He can guard bigger players, he can switch onto bigs, and he's an awesome help defender. AB isn't as versatile and he's only an above-average help defender, with less awesome anticipation and inconsistent positioning.

Re: Is Smart expendable?
« Reply #64 on: March 28, 2016, 07:52:45 PM »

Offline TheTruth

  • Kristaps Porzingis
  • Posts: 191
  • Tommy Points: 13
Loco,

IT is a star. He probably can be even better as he hasn't been hitting that pull up three that much this season. If he gets into a better groove next year, I can see him averaging over 25.

Re: Is Smart expendable?
« Reply #65 on: March 28, 2016, 08:34:50 PM »

Offline crimson_stallion

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5964
  • Tommy Points: 875
Marcus Smart is definitely expendable, and I think anybody who believes otherwise has a serious case of green glasses syndrome.

The problem with Smart is that right now, he is a strict role player.  He's basically a pure defensive/hustle guy who can't really do a lot of anything else with consistency.

* He is a competent ball handler and passer by combo guard standards, but not by PG standards

* He's a terrible finisher inside the paint

* He has zero midrange game - I mean absolutely zero

* His three point shot is horribly inconsistent

* His basketball IQ is questionable, given his tendency to make terrible decisions both on offense (shot selection) and on defence (tendency to commit stupid fouls)

* His inability to control his temper is starting to get him into some real trouble, to the point where he's going to earn a Rasheed Wallace like reputation if he's not careful - his tendency to argue every call is getting tiring and is already impacting his ability to get respect from officials

* His general lack of great athleticism and offensive skills greatly limit his ability to create offense and be anything more than a spot up shooter

Smart is so good defensively and has such a high motor / work ethic that I'll never count him out, but the more I see of him the more I start to have doubts about how high his ceiling is.  At first I thought he had the potential to become a fringe all-star, now I'm starting to question if he'll ever be good enough to be a 30+ MPG starter on a good playoff team.

At the very least, Smart needs to learn better shot selection (5+ attempts from three when you're shooting below 28% is not acceptable) and he needs to either (a) improve his jump-shot substantially or (b) learn to become a good finisher around the basket.  Until he can do those two things it's going to be hard for him to ever earn himself a consistent sixth man role, let alone a consistent stating role on a good team.  He's nowhere near dependable enough right not to take the 6th man role away from Turner. 

Smart is already buried behind Bradley, Thomas and Turner in the rotation, and the worrying thing is that now even Rozier is starting to put some pressure on him despite the fact that he has minimal NBA experience.  Rozier was playing some crunch time minute in the last game against Phoenix, which shows that Stevens is really starting to get confidence in him.   If Rozier can prove that he belongs out there on a consistent basis, then it's going to get very hard for Stevens to manage a 7 man rotation of Thomas, Bradley, Turner, Smart, Rozier and Crowder...with Smart starting to look like the odd man out.

I like the situation we have right now.  Thomas and Bradley are the clear starters right now, and are by far the most consistent producers in the backcourt (since Turner is mostly backing up Crowder at SF).  Rozier and Smart are both high motor, high work ethic, 'chip on my shoulder' guys who have the mentality of wanting to be great, so it's really up to those to guys to battle it out for that backup combo-guard role.  I like this because it means those two guys are both going to have to prove they want it more.

Right now we have a Brooklyn pick in the top 5 all but guaranteed, and we also have a Mavs pick that is now top 12, with a chance of dropping further with Parsons gone for he season.  We have the potential to land two top 10 picks if the basketball gods swing things our way, and that gives a lot of flexibility.

* If the Brooklyn pick falls 4 or 5 we could try to package the Nets pick and the Dallas pick to move into the top 3.

* If the Dallas pick lands at 12, we could try to package it with the Celtics pick to move into the top 10

* If the Dallas pick lands top 10, we could trade the Nets pick for an established star, and still draft a top 10 prospect

* If the Nets pick falls top 3 we can draft a potential future star, then try to package Smart + Mavs pick + Celtics pick for an established star

On the plus, Smart is still very young and he is showing signs of improvement - rebounding better, passing better, doing a much better job at getting to the line (FTR has almost doubled since his rookie year) so there is some promise there if he can get his head on right and develop his game.  Guys like Crowder, Thomas and Turner are only just starting to take their games to the next level not at the age of 25-26 so Smart still has a LOT of time to show us what he can do.

Still, I do not think Danny would hesitate to trade Smart if he feels the return is worthwhile - e.g. a star who he feels can put us over the top for the long term (Cousins, Butler, etc). 

« Last Edit: March 28, 2016, 08:47:14 PM by crimson_stallion »

Re: Is Smart expendable?
« Reply #66 on: March 28, 2016, 09:17:49 PM »

Offline TheTruth

  • Kristaps Porzingis
  • Posts: 191
  • Tommy Points: 13
Crimson,

Great post. Tough to add much to this thread now. You pretty much said it all.

I will however add that I can see Smart being packaged with the Mavs pick to snag Hield.

We could end up with Brown and Hield in the draft.

Re: Is Smart expendable?
« Reply #67 on: March 28, 2016, 10:16:22 PM »

Offline crimson_stallion

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5964
  • Tommy Points: 875
Crimson,

Great post. Tough to add much to this thread now. You pretty much said it all.

I will however add that I can see Smart being packaged with the Mavs pick to snag Hield.

We could end up with Brown and Hield in the draft.

I really like Hield - I think he has a TON of upside and has an outside chance to become the best player in this draft 3 years from now.  I could very easily see him becoming a Wall / Lillard calibre player.

Unfortunately I could also see him become another Jordan Crawford / Marshon Brooks type player. 

I think his upside makes it worth the gamble though.

He could become better than either Simmons or Ingram.

Re: Is Smart expendable?
« Reply #68 on: March 28, 2016, 10:26:00 PM »

Offline greece66

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7395
  • Tommy Points: 1342
  • Head Paperboy at Greenville
Marcus Smart is definitely expendable, and I think anybody who believes otherwise has a serious case of green glasses syndrome.

The problem with Smart is that right now, he is a strict role player.  He's basically a pure defensive/hustle guy who can't really do a lot of anything else with consistency.

* He is a competent ball handler and passer by combo guard standards, but not by PG standards

* He's a terrible finisher inside the paint

* He has zero midrange game - I mean absolutely zero

* His three point shot is horribly inconsistent

* His basketball IQ is questionable, given his tendency to make terrible decisions both on offense (shot selection) and on defence (tendency to commit stupid fouls)

* His inability to control his temper is starting to get him into some real trouble, to the point where he's going to earn a Rasheed Wallace like reputation if he's not careful - his tendency to argue every call is getting tiring and is already impacting his ability to get respect from officials

* His general lack of great athleticism and offensive skills greatly limit his ability to create offense and be anything more than a spot up shooter

Smart is so good defensively and has such a high motor / work ethic that I'll never count him out, but the more I see of him the more I start to have doubts about how high his ceiling is.  At first I thought he had the potential to become a fringe all-star, now I'm starting to question if he'll ever be good enough to be a 30+ MPG starter on a good playoff team.

At the very least, Smart needs to learn better shot selection (5+ attempts from three when you're shooting below 28% is not acceptable) and he needs to either (a) improve his jump-shot substantially or (b) learn to become a good finisher around the basket.  Until he can do those two things it's going to be hard for him to ever earn himself a consistent sixth man role, let alone a consistent stating role on a good team.  He's nowhere near dependable enough right not to take the 6th man role away from Turner. 

Smart is already buried behind Bradley, Thomas and Turner in the rotation, and the worrying thing is that now even Rozier is starting to put some pressure on him despite the fact that he has minimal NBA experience.  Rozier was playing some crunch time minute in the last game against Phoenix, which shows that Stevens is really starting to get confidence in him.   If Rozier can prove that he belongs out there on a consistent basis, then it's going to get very hard for Stevens to manage a 7 man rotation of Thomas, Bradley, Turner, Smart, Rozier and Crowder...with Smart starting to look like the odd man out.

I like the situation we have right now.  Thomas and Bradley are the clear starters right now, and are by far the most consistent producers in the backcourt (since Turner is mostly backing up Crowder at SF).  Rozier and Smart are both high motor, high work ethic, 'chip on my shoulder' guys who have the mentality of wanting to be great, so it's really up to those to guys to battle it out for that backup combo-guard role.  I like this because it means those two guys are both going to have to prove they want it more.

Right now we have a Brooklyn pick in the top 5 all but guaranteed, and we also have a Mavs pick that is now top 12, with a chance of dropping further with Parsons gone for he season.  We have the potential to land two top 10 picks if the basketball gods swing things our way, and that gives a lot of flexibility.

* If the Brooklyn pick falls 4 or 5 we could try to package the Nets pick and the Dallas pick to move into the top 3.

* If the Dallas pick lands at 12, we could try to package it with the Celtics pick to move into the top 10

* If the Dallas pick lands top 10, we could trade the Nets pick for an established star, and still draft a top 10 prospect

* If the Nets pick falls top 3 we can draft a potential future star, then try to package Smart + Mavs pick + Celtics pick for an established star

On the plus, Smart is still very young and he is showing signs of improvement - rebounding better, passing better, doing a much better job at getting to the line (FTR has almost doubled since his rookie year) so there is some promise there if he can get his head on right and develop his game.  Guys like Crowder, Thomas and Turner are only just starting to take their games to the next level not at the age of 25-26 so Smart still has a LOT of time to show us what he can do.

Still, I do not think Danny would hesitate to trade Smart if he feels the return is worthwhile - e.g. a star who he feels can put us over the top for the long term (Cousins, Butler, etc).

Great write-up, TP.

A side note on the bolded part: it's pretty safe to assume that the Dallas pick won't land in the top-10 given its 1-7 protection.

http://www.tankathon.com/pick_odds

Re: Is Smart expendable?
« Reply #69 on: March 28, 2016, 10:30:50 PM »

Offline TheTruth

  • Kristaps Porzingis
  • Posts: 191
  • Tommy Points: 13
Crimson,

Hield could be the Paul Pierce of the draft.

The guy with the most game that every team over looks cause he's not the top athlete.




Re: Is Smart expendable?
« Reply #70 on: March 29, 2016, 11:06:03 AM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • NCE
  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17914
  • Tommy Points: 1294
Marcus is definitely the better defender and the best on the team.  He proved that when he pwned Harden. This is why Brad feels he can put him at small forward.
That worked great every time we tried it, didn't we?

The only reason Smart ever played SF for us is because we couldn't field another healthy NBA-caliber player at the position.
"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."