Would MIN accept Marcus Smart for the #5 pick?

[Beat LA]

Dunn is a poor man's Smart?  What on earth are you smoking?  Dunn is infinitely superior to Smart in absolutely every aspect of the game beyond MAYBE defense - and even that is a big maybe.

Dunn has the same type of size, intangibles and defensive ability that Smart has but he's an elite ball handler, an elite passer, an elite athlete and a solid (if not great) shooter.  He is so much better then Smart that it's not even funny.  I would give up Smart and #16 and #23 if it would get me Dunn - and I wouldn't even have to think about it.

I'm not one of those resident CelticsBlog Smart haters either - I actually really like him.  Dunn is just THAT good.

So what you're saying is that you're Dunn with Smart?

[adam.jones614]

Considering Smart is far better than anyone who will be available at 5....yeah I think Min would accept....and laugh at you...and i'd cry.....so there's that

Really?

It's pretty much guaranteed that either Hield, Dunn or Murray will be available at #5 - all three of those guys have a higher upside then Smart does.

Even Brown and Bender have a higher upside then Smart does, and it doesn't end there.

This draft is FAR better then the 14/15 draft, where Smart was taken at #6.  If I had the chance to trade Smart for the #7 pick or #8 pick I think I would very seriously consider it.  Trading him for #5 is a no brainer.

Come on dude. the 14/15 draft is one of the better drafts in several years. It's far better than this draft. I wouldn't trade Smart for anyone outside the top 2. I think he goes top 3 easy in this draft

[TheSundanceKid]

There is 0% chance Boston would do this... why turn a guy who they put in so much time into, is an elite defender, and has improved his shooting?

I take it you voted "yes".

The only part of this that's both true and relevant is that Smart is an elite defender. The Cs have other truly elite wing defenders, not to mention recent draft picks at Smart's position.

So, there are a variety of reasons they might. Two examples:

1) they find a nice deal for a veteran guard that includes the 3 pick but doesn't include Smart, but see a draft prospect they believe has high upside at 5.

2) they can't find a good deal for 3, take another guard with that pick because they deem him BPA, and still see a draft prospect they believe has higher upside than Smart at 5.

I don't buy the Cs wouldn't trade Smart because he's played there for 2 years. And I'd be absolutely shocked is Ainge and Thibs don't talk deal in some way shape or form before the draft.

Smart is a guy loved by Team USA, lauded for his impact on defence, out of this world competitive, young and already a more solid pro than most draft picks turn into. It would be illogical to trade him for a draft pick of a guy who might pan out better. I can see the logic behind using him in a deal for a star but not to trade up in a draft that is apparently short in superstar talent

Thinnest post I've read lately. You're a fan. That's great. But just because you don't want him traded doesn't make it illogical to do so if the Cs feel a better player is available.

Regardless, the poll question is regarding how the Wolves may value Marcus. Clearly you see him as worthy of such a deal, so appreciate the feedback.

Well luckily everything that coach Stevens and Ainge have said indicates that the Cs value him high enough not to trade him for a draft pick.

I definitely think him worthy of that deal, in fact as you may have guessed I think the deal undervalues him.

I understand that "we need shooters" and whatnot but that doesn't equal "sell our guys on the cheap". Anyone with doubt about his shot can look to Bradley as an example of his projected improvement. I don't really see other downsides to him apart from the flopping which I hope goes away.

I also don't see anyone at 5 who is likely to end up a better player than Smart. Murray will be a good shooter but he'll give up as many on the defensive end, Dunn is a poor mans Smart and Hield I believe will struggle to translate his success to the NBA.

Dunn is a poor man's Smart?  What on earth are you smoking?  Dunn is infinitely superior to Smart in absolutely every aspect of the game beyond MAYBE defense - and even that is a big maybe.

Dunn has the same type of size, intangibles and defensive ability that Smart has but he's an elite ball handler, an elite passer, an elite athlete and a solid (if not great) shooter.  He is so much better then Smart that it's not even funny.  I would give up Smart and #16 and #23 if it would get me Dunn - and I wouldn't even have to think about it.   

I'm not one of those resident CelticsBlog Smart haters either - I actually really like him.  Dunn is just THAT good.

You see whilst I give Dunn the better shooting I don't give him the others. Yes if you do a direct comparison of stats then Dunn comes out on top but it's obvious that the talent level skews these stats.
Go back to Smart's last year in college and he basically puts up the same stats as Dunn this year!

Dunn: 16.4ppg, 5.3rpg, 6.2apg, 2.5spg, .448 FG%, .372 3P%, 3.5TOV

Smart: 18.0ppg, 5.9rpg, 4.8apg, 2.9spg, .422 FG%, .299 3P%, 2.6TOV

Like I said I'll give Dunn the better shooting but in the other categories a 20 year old Smart was at least comparable if not better. Given two extra years in college I figure Smart would have improved a little as well, is that fair to say? at least to me it seems clear his ball handling has come on the last two years as has his court vision. Clearly the shooting is still a big knock on his game although I see sound fundamentals in the motion.

Obviously I'm only using stats here, there could be something I'm missing from the film on Dunn. I've seen a lot more of Smart than I have Dunn as you can imagine.

I feel the same way with Hield, yes their stats are impressive and you cannot take away from them that they are talented, however the way they are compared to prospects of the same age who left college earlier often ignores the level of competition. Of course shooting numbers take a hit against better competition. I don't expect Hield to come in and knock down 3s at 45% in his rookie year! Yet when we compare them to guys like Smart, Wiggins or Exum we somehow excuse the seniors while criticising the NBA players.

[BornReady]

I'm surprise how close this poll is

With Murray, Dunn, and Hield all being within range, I can't see minny trading their pick for smart

[BornReady]

There is 0% chance Boston would do this... why turn a guy who they put in so much time into, is an elite defender, and has improved his shooting?

I take it you voted "yes".

The only part of this that's both true and relevant is that Smart is an elite defender. The Cs have other truly elite wing defenders, not to mention recent draft picks at Smart's position.

So, there are a variety of reasons they might. Two examples:

1) they find a nice deal for a veteran guard that includes the 3 pick but doesn't include Smart, but see a draft prospect they believe has high upside at 5.

2) they can't find a good deal for 3, take another guard with that pick because they deem him BPA, and still see a draft prospect they believe has higher upside than Smart at 5.

I don't buy the Cs wouldn't trade Smart because he's played there for 2 years. And I'd be absolutely shocked is Ainge and Thibs don't talk deal in some way shape or form before the draft.

Smart is a guy loved by Team USA, lauded for his impact on defence, out of this world competitive, young and already a more solid pro than most draft picks turn into. It would be illogical to trade him for a draft pick of a guy who might pan out better. I can see the logic behind using him in a deal for a star but not to trade up in a draft that is apparently short in superstar talent

Thinnest post I've read lately. You're a fan. That's great. But just because you don't want him traded doesn't make it illogical to do so if the Cs feel a better player is available.

Regardless, the poll question is regarding how the Wolves may value Marcus. Clearly you see him as worthy of such a deal, so appreciate the feedback.

Well luckily everything that coach Stevens and Ainge have said indicates that the Cs value him high enough not to trade him for a draft pick.

I definitely think him worthy of that deal, in fact as you may have guessed I think the deal undervalues him.

I understand that "we need shooters" and whatnot but that doesn't equal "sell our guys on the cheap". Anyone with doubt about his shot can look to Bradley as an example of his projected improvement. I don't really see other downsides to him apart from the flopping which I hope goes away.

I also don't see anyone at 5 who is likely to end up a better player than Smart. Murray will be a good shooter but he'll give up as many on the defensive end, Dunn is a poor mans Smart and Hield I believe will struggle to translate his success to the NBA.

Dunn is a poor man's Smart?  What on earth are you smoking?  Dunn is infinitely superior to Smart in absolutely every aspect of the game beyond MAYBE defense - and even that is a big maybe.

Dunn has the same type of size, intangibles and defensive ability that Smart has but he's an elite ball handler, an elite passer, an elite athlete and a solid (if not great) shooter.  He is so much better then Smart that it's not even funny.  I would give up Smart and #16 and #23 if it would get me Dunn - and I wouldn't even have to think about it.   

I'm not one of those resident CelticsBlog Smart haters either - I actually really like him.  Dunn is just THAT good.

You see whilst I give Dunn the better shooting I don't give him the others. Yes if you do a direct comparison of stats then Dunn comes out on top but it's obvious that the talent level skews these stats.
Go back to Smart's last year in college and he basically puts up the same stats as Dunn this year!

Dunn: 16.4ppg, 5.3rpg, 6.2apg, 2.5spg, .448 FG%, .372 3P%, 3.5TOV

Smart: 18.0ppg, 5.9rpg, 4.8apg, 2.9spg, .422 FG%, .299 3P%, 2.6TOV

Like I said I'll give Dunn the better shooting but in the other categories a 20 year old Smart was at least comparable if not better. Given two extra years in college I figure Smart would have improved a little as well, is that fair to say? at least to me it seems clear his ball handling has come on the last two years as has his court vision. Clearly the shooting is still a big knock on his game although I see sound fundamentals in the motion.

Obviously I'm only using stats here, there could be something I'm missing from the film on Dunn. I've seen a lot more of Smart than I have Dunn as you can imagine.

I feel the same way with Hield, yes their stats are impressive and you cannot take away from them that they are talented, however the way they are compared to prospects of the same age who left college earlier often ignores the level of competition. Of course shooting numbers take a hit against better competition. I don't expect Hield to come in and knock down 3s at 45% in his rookie year! Yet when we compare them to guys like Smart, Wiggins or Exum we somehow excuse the seniors while criticising the NBA players.

I think when comparing Dunn vs smart
It important to note their differences in playing style and body type in how they translate to the nba

Smart is a defensive minded guard who uses his hustle and strength to outmuscle opponents. He is much slower than Dunn. And would be seen as SG or combo guard rather than PG.

Dunn has same height as smart but is more prototypical of a guard where he is athletic, fast and has agility. He is a true PG. he has the ball handling, play making and athleticism needed to succeed as a PG in the NBA level compared to smart while still productive is too slow against quicker guards.

[pearljammer10]

Sure but why would we?

[Celtics4ever]

I love Smart but his lack of shooting is something I worry about from time to time.

[Donoghus]

Sure but why would we?

That's what I'm asking myself here.

[dreamgreen]

Sure but why would we?

That's what I'm asking myself here.

That's a good point, I'm not the biggest Smart fan but there is no reason to believe #5 will be better than him.

[RebusRankin]

I think the Wolves would rather add Murray or Hield to their core.

[ssspence]

I guess you guys haven't watched the wolves much because Smart is about as bad as a fit as you can get for that team. Their number one problem is shooting, and you propose to take their best spot up shooter, Lavine, out of the lineup for a bricklayer named Smart? Yes they had defensive woes last year, but that's what bringing in Thibs is for. You don't bring in a defensive mastermind just to go and get great defensive players, you bring him in to improve your defense and make bad defensive players better. If I coached a team of Rubio/Smart/Wiggins/Dieng/KAT, I would have them in the top 10 of defense.
So there is no way the wolves would do this deal, as they would need the shooting of Murray/Bender/Hield/Chriss much more than they would need the defense of Smart.

Who said anything about replacing Levine? Why wouldn't the two pair up in the Wolves backcourt?

Because Rubio is a better player than both of them. If you wanted to just bench Rubio, the wolves would just take Dunn. This trade just doesn't make sense for them.

Excellent chance Dunn is gone at 5. And if you gave 29 NBA GMs a trade exception big enough for either right now and asked them to choose, I'd wager all but one or two of them would take Levine over Rubio. So I doubt your judgement on this topic.

[ssspence]

Sure but why would we?

That's what I'm asking myself here.

I think I prefaced this. Cs would have to prefer a player available at 5. I've heard they do, but getting into another debate about draft stock is not what I wanted to do here -- there's more than enough of that to go around in the forums. I was purely interested in the IF that's true... would Minneaota pull the trigger.

[mkogav]

I'm really not interested in getting into another thread about prospect comparisons. What I'd like to know from fellow bloggers is whether it's reasonable to think Tom Thibadeau would be willing to trade the #5 pick for Marcus Smart, if Ainge were indeed interested.

Personally, I think it's a little too much to hope for. But considering the extreme youth of their roster, Thibs' total impatience with rebuilding / losing, and his love of hard headed defenders, I see it as a legit question....

Coach Thibs would do this deal in a heart beat. It's an awful shortsighted impatient out-of-character deal for the Celtics. That is why the deal would never ever ever happen. You are severely underrating and undervaluing Marcus Smart.

Mk

[ssspence]

I'm really not interested in getting into another thread about prospect comparisons. What I'd like to know from fellow bloggers is whether it's reasonable to think Tom Thibadeau would be willing to trade the #5 pick for Marcus Smart, if Ainge were indeed interested.

Personally, I think it's a little too much to hope for. But considering the extreme youth of their roster, Thibs' total impatience with rebuilding / losing, and his love of hard headed defenders, I see it as a legit question....

Coach Thibs would do this deal in a heart beat. It's an awful shortsighted impatient out-of-character deal for the Celtics. That is why the deal would never ever ever happen. You are severely underrating and undervaluing Marcus Smart.

Mk

Sorry, but this is a homer post. The 5th pick in the NBA draft is a valuable asset. It's not some kind of insult to question whether Smart -- who is a good player, but certainly not a star player -- could fetch such an asset.

[Donoghus]

I'm really not interested in getting into another thread about prospect comparisons. What I'd like to know from fellow bloggers is whether it's reasonable to think Tom Thibadeau would be willing to trade the #5 pick for Marcus Smart, if Ainge were indeed interested.

Personally, I think it's a little too much to hope for. But considering the extreme youth of their roster, Thibs' total impatience with rebuilding / losing, and his love of hard headed defenders, I see it as a legit question....

Coach Thibs would do this deal in a heart beat. It's an awful shortsighted impatient out-of-character deal for the Celtics. That is why the deal would never ever ever happen. You are severely underrating and undervaluing Marcus Smart.

Mk

Sorry, but this is a homer post. The 5th pick in the NBA draft is a valuable asset. It's not some kind of insult to question whether Smart -- who is a good player, but certainly not a star player -- could fetch such an asset.

But why would Ainge give up on Smart (who was the 6th overall pick himself) after only two years, just to acquire another guard who will have a learning curve himself and will probably be behind Smart's development at this point.

Essentially, you'd be downgrading right off the bat with #3 & #5 v. #3 & Smart.