'Rozier vs. Smart' Debate - An Interesting perspective

[clover]

You don't have to love Smart, if the shooting numbers bother you...but anyone who calls
him a bust doesn't understand basketball.

He's a top 6 pick who has no offensive game at this point in his career.  Call it bust, call it needing development, or call it anything else you want.  In the end, it's all the same thing.

Would you call Marcus Camby a bust?

Marcus Camby ended his career with Per-36 averages of 11.6 points, 11.9 rebounds, 1.,2 steals, 2.9 blocks,

As a rookie he averaged 15 points, 6 rebounds, 1 steal and blocks in 30 minutes.

Sorry, but Smart is not close to Camby's defensive level, and he doesn't give you 10 rebounds a game.

Yesterday's centers are today's point guards. Majority of superstars today are PGs/SGs and Smart is shutting them down on a consistent basis. He may not be a shooter but he's a decent playmaker and a very good rebounder in his position.

If Bruce Bowen's draft class was redone, he'd certainly be at top 10 pick.

So far, no players past Smart in his draft class stood out.

Actually some PGs are too fast for Smart to defend. There's probably not a PG in the league, however, that Rozier won't be able to well cover. Smart is ideal on 2s, and as we have seen has the versatility to cover either larger or smaller players than that.

[rollie mass]

Crimson, I wonder how you view Jackson, then, as he's a better athlete, shooter, passer, and at least comparable on defense, to Rozier.  I'd also say that he's a better ball handler, namely because Rozier blatantly palms the ball almost every time he dribbles, lol .

Jackson, to me, looks more like a true point guard, while Rozier is a combo guard who is learning to play point guard, and largely plays out of control, gets in the air before he knows what he's going to do, and seems oblivious to the other four guys on the court.  I also wouldn't say that he's Rondo-esque as far as rebounding.  If you're going that route, look no further than Gary Payton II.

I do agree with you, however, that Rozier has considerably more skill and talent, and, as a result, more upside, than Smart.  That, unfortunately, is painfully obvious, imo, lol .

I really like Jackson - I have been very high on him for about the last 6 months, while I've been researching on prospects.  Watching him play and the things he can do on the court, I've always felt he looked like a lottery caliber talent - I was honestly shocked as hell to see him fall as far as he did.

When it comes to an argument of Jackson vs Rozier, I think the reason why Rozier's odds are better is primarily his more versatile skill set. 

Rozier at the combined measured at 6'2", 190 pounds, with a 6'8" wingspan and 8'2" vertical reach.  While he doesn't have optimal height for the SG spot, his combination of strength and length largely make up for that.  Defensively he has the length to guard 2's and the quickness to guard 1's.

Offensively he can shoot, he can drive, he can dribble and he can pass - he's solid at all those things.  That means he can handle a "combo guard" type role, and can switch between the two guard spots without much trouble.

There is the rebounding, too.

Jackson is an even better athlete the Rozier I would say, and has great strength.  However his size is going to really restrict him to the PG spot.  At 6'1" / 190 pounds / 6'5" wingspan he just doesn't have the height or length to guard NBA 2's on anything close to a consistent basis.  He's also not as good a defender as Rozier in general - I think he could become a solid defender, but Rozier's got a lot more potential on that end.

So size pretty much limits Jackson to be a pure PG, which is fine because that's who he is. He's a pretty good passer, a natural playmaker, a very good ball handler.  Explosive quickness.  He can shoot the ball too. Reminds me a bit of a young Chris Paul.

Personaly, I think Rozier and Jackson have similar upside.  I think both have the talent level to be borderline All-Stars one day. If either of those two guys one day made an all-star team, I wouldn't be shocked at all.  I can't say the same for Smart, to be honest.

very nice piece of writing crimson- TP
smart shot 34% from three his rookie year-not bad for a rookie with no lift
i am not making excuses but  the reality is marcus suffered some very painfull and serious injuries to key areas
it was not just the injury time but the on court recovery time that make stats useless
also the intensity of his defence and having to quard multiple positions takes its toll on the offensive end, avery shoots better early in games and lastly -marcus has to clean up for jerebko and kelly as they dump him the ball with time running out
rozier has yet to play and guard the westbrooks,durants,hardins and millsaps,has not suffered catastrophic injuries-chris paul lliard,curry,d wade ,rose,derozans of the league back to back and on west coast trips-
has not had to be part of a defence that wins games without a rim protector,not had to guard millsap,durant and coverup for chrowder being out both on offence and defence
rozier has not been put in any real point guard role
smart was out with the big boys and did that high ankle sprain that effected him well into next summer
this was not written to minimize rozier but from a ex players experience with injuriesr and the effects of injuries on a players shooting ,stats and progress
also the effects of playing 110% on defence and when defence is your offence without even a shot blocker-look what a slight ankle sprain did to chrowder-marcus had to be littered off the court or the effects of dislocated fingers on early season shooting and then the dislocated knee that kept him out till new year-
smart is not injury prone in the classic sense but he pushes his body to the limit and it breaks 

[rollie mass]

I dislike articles like this.  The first line "when marcus was drafted he was seen as the heir to rajon rondo".  I think my exact quote when we drafted him was I more see him as just a basketball player, who can play some pg but play off the ball as well and just do a lot of different things.  He hasn't even had a chance to really play point  yet with  Isaiah and Turner here.  He's been playing more off the ball and has been contributing in other ways.  This might be the first year where he actually gets to really play the point with any consistency.  With Rozier here they are stlll going to be splitting duties.

People see him as a bust because they don't understand his game and the situation of the team.  He's a 3rd year player who played 2 years in college. 

He was mainly a volume scorer in college but a great defender with the ability to improve offensively.

I did not see him as the heir to rajon rondo when we drafted him.  I thought he gave us options there but that Danny might add another pg and he did.

Over time he can grow into more of a pg, but that's what we are doing.

He was drafted because of his overall talent as a basketball player though.  I really like Rozier.  I loved that pick when we made it as well when a lot of people panned it but he is not as talented as Marcus. He's more a scorer yes.

If you listen to Ainge's description of Marcus when he was drafted he said the same things.  He was not drafted to be the heir to Rondo.  Nor was he seen as that.  Maybe in the writers mind he was.  He gave us options there but was more drafted for the reasons stated.  He still does give us options there. He's also a developing pg but has more been utilized in other ways.

I read articles like that with a deadpan look on my face. Did the writer even listen to Danny Ainge?

Marcus isn't a bust. He's exactly what I thought he'd be so far.  That's how the celtics have been utilizing him. If they decide he's the heir to rajon rondo and start playing him more at point then he's that but that's not how they've been utiliziing him.  I expect him to play more point this year. He's had a couple years experience and his production should see a good bump.  That's not how they've been utilizing him early in his career though.  He still needs to improve offensively particularly as a shooter.

because it is in print it must be true-is shooting 34% in rookie year the author uses the word atrocious  in 2015 avery shot 34%--smart shot poorly in 2016 i believe due to injuries,gordon hayward shot 34% this year

[walker834]

I dislike articles like this.  The first line "when marcus was drafted he was seen as the heir to rajon rondo".  I think my exact quote when we drafted him was I more see him as just a basketball player, who can play some pg but play off the ball as well and just do a lot of different things.  He hasn't even had a chance to really play point  yet with  Isaiah and Turner here.  He's been playing more off the ball and has been contributing in other ways.  This might be the first year where he actually gets to really play the point with any consistency.  With Rozier here they are stlll going to be splitting duties.

People see him as a bust because they don't understand his game and the situation of the team.  He's a 3rd year player who played 2 years in college. 

He was mainly a volume scorer in college but a great defender with the ability to improve offensively.

I did not see him as the heir to rajon rondo when we drafted him.  I thought he gave us options there but that Danny might add another pg and he did.

Over time he can grow into more of a pg, but that's what we are doing.

He was drafted because of his overall talent as a basketball player though.  I really like Rozier.  I loved that pick when we made it as well when a lot of people panned it but he is not as talented as Marcus. He's more a scorer yes.

If you listen to Ainge's description of Marcus when he was drafted he said the same things.  He was not drafted to be the heir to Rondo.  Nor was he seen as that.  Maybe in the writers mind he was.  He gave us options there but was more drafted for the reasons stated.  He still does give us options there. He's also a developing pg but has more been utilized in other ways.

I read articles like that with a deadpan look on my face. Did the writer even listen to Danny Ainge?

Marcus isn't a bust. He's exactly what I thought he'd be so far.  That's how the celtics have been utilizing him. If they decide he's the heir to rajon rondo and start playing him more at point then he's that but that's not how they've been utiliziing him.  I expect him to play more point this year. He's had a couple years experience and his production should see a good bump.  That's not how they've been utilizing him early in his career though.  He still needs to improve offensively particularly as a shooter.

because it is in print it must be true-is shooting 34% in rookie year the author uses the word atrocious  in 2015 avery shot 34%--smart shot poorly in 2016 i believe due to injuries,gordon hayward shot 34% this year

That's what I mean. He's a developing offensive player.  This was known when he was drafted.  Even Stevens said that his offense isn't there yet but his defense is.  He wasn't seen as the heir to Rajon Rondo. If he was why did we trade for Isaiah?

Some players improve.  Some don't.  I hope Marcus is putting in work and does.  He has the ability.  Some players just aren't like Tony Allen.  I don't see how people can say he was a bust though when he wasn't expected to be an offensive juggernaut or our starting pg from day one.

jaylen was a 38 percent 3 pt shooter in highschool. Had one bad year in college and su ddenly he can't shoot.

Kawii Leonard shot 24 percent from 3 in college. He shot poorly his first few years but has really turned it up.

[ssspence]

Nah, Marcus is pretty good.   Defends anyone.   Who else can defend LITERALLY anyone?

What else can he do? Smart's an excellent defender, but he's subpar at literally everything else (save for offensive rebounding).

[walker834]

I don't know if he is subpar at everything else. His assist to turnover ratio is pretty good.  It's 3 to 1 which is star level. He also seems to hit clutch shots. He isn't just a one trick pony offensively either.  His percentages are bad but I bet if you look at how he scores he does it in a variety of ways.

I'm not a huge number guy though.  I more look at what he is doing. He doesn't seem to turn it over a lot though and plays within the team.  That's more than a lot of players.  He also has a variety of different ways he scores.

The celtics record is also pretty good when he is healthy.

If you look at comparable pgs there are very few that average his steals, rebounds, assists per minute plus shoot the 3 and fill up the boxscore like he does. 

[Ilikesports17]

Nah, Marcus is pretty good.   Defends anyone.   Who else can defend LITERALLY anyone?

What else can he do? Smart's an excellent defender, but he's subpar at literally everything else (save for offensive rebounding).

Hes got the clutch gene and hes better in loose ball situations than anyone. Hes not a great passer, but he has good court vision in my opinion. Also, it seemed to me that at the end of the year he was finally getting into the paint while under control. Doing that consistently will be a key to upping his FG% and assist numbers etc. If he can do that more, while also upping his 3pt% to 35% he should become an OK offensive player. Which is all you need when he brings all the other stuff to the table.

[ssspence]

Nah, Marcus is pretty good.   Defends anyone.   Who else can defend LITERALLY anyone?

What else can he do? Smart's an excellent defender, but he's subpar at literally everything else (save for offensive rebounding).

Hes got the clutch gene and hes better in loose ball situations than anyone. Hes not a great passer, but he has good court vision in my opinion. Also, it seemed to me that at the end of the year he was finally getting into the paint while under control. Doing that consistently will be a key to upping his FG% and assist numbers etc. If he can do that more, while also upping his 3pt% to 35% he should become an OK offensive player. Which is all you need when he brings all the other stuff to the table.

This is homer stuff, largely. I get the love for his intangibles, but he lacks effective skills in many areas.

[GreenCoffeeBean]

Can we please recognize the entire reason we are having this conversation is that up till now Smart has been a bust?

Any half way decent guard would be forcing this conversation at this point because Smart has simply not lived up to expectations.  He needs to come back with an offensive game about 300% better than he was last year to make this conversation go away.

I heard Horford came here because he was sick of being guarded by Smart. There's an article about it. Let me find the link*

* This article does not exist.
Nah, Marcus is pretty good.   Defends anyone.   Who else can defend LITERALLY anyone?

Problem is, Roze is good too.   This has been his thing throughout his short career.  He gets compared to the *potential* of lotto pick players.   Thing that is confounding -- as I see it -- he's better NOW than a lot of of these lotto players project.   Not sure if he's caught Smart yet, but it's certainly up for debate.

This is how these stories start lol, year from now he will have shut down every center in the league.

Don't forget there is that other side of the court also, the one where half the game is played on.

[CelticGuardian]

My hope is that both these guys can be productive thus leaving us in a good position once Isaiah's contract becomes a question... but if Terry outplays Smart, IDC about Smart's lottery status or fan appeal.. I'd want Rozier playing the minutes he's earned.

[CelticGuardian]

Rozier can do more with the ball, Smart is a defensive anchor of sorts... it will be an interesting and hard choice to make for Danny if both of these guys become starter quality players

[Ed Hollison]

A few points:

1)   We should be able to get excited about Rozier without denigrating Smart. Why is one’s progress a knock on the other? The way the game is played now, both of those guys could end up in the same backcourt as two guys that can both handle the ball and guard both backcourt spots. There’s a ton of examples like this in the league now. Anyway: you don’t need to put down Smart because you like Rozier, or vice versa.

2)   I really do not get posters’ inclination to dump on Smart. Have people been watching the games? The guy is already, in my opinion, one of the best backcourt defenders in the league. Defensively he is perfectly designed for the modern NBA, as a guy who can switch onto defending players of all sizes and abilities. By all accounts he’s a hard worker, has a leader’s personality, is good in the clutch, and has some serious “dog” in him, the type of attitude that KG brought to the team in 2007 that changed the culture of the whole franchise. His jump shooting has been poor, but other aspects of his game – for instance, how he runs the pick and roll – improved significantly from year 1 to year 2. Like I’ve said in the past, considering his defense, if he were to grow into even a middling offensive player he’d be one of the most valuable guards in the league.

3)   These guys are both just barely 22 years old. We have not seen Smart play since he was 21. The notion that these guys are EVEN CLOSE to being finished products, especially at a position that takes as much seasoning as point guard, is downright crazy. Shooting especially is something that can improve. Keep in mind that Tim Hardaway (senior, not junior) shot 27% from 3 his first year in the league, when he was 23 years old. His career 3 point percentage turned out to be 36%. For goodness sake, have some patience on these guys.

[Big333223]

Everything I feel about this article is encapsulated by these two quotes:

It’s no secret that Smart has struggled with his three-point shot early in his career. His three-point percentage somehow dipped from his atrocious 33.5 percent as a rookie to 25.3 percent last season.

As far as Rozier, he wasn’t much better shooting from the outside. He’s never been consistent from behind the arc and his 22.2 three-point percentage as a rookie backs it up.

The writer seems to be confusing "he wasn't much better" with "he was significantly worse."

The whole piece reads to me like a barroom argument that just came to him and hasn't been fully thought out yet. I'm very optimistic on Rozier, but talk to me when he's done something on the court.

[Ilikesports17]

Nah, Marcus is pretty good.   Defends anyone.   Who else can defend LITERALLY anyone?

What else can he do? Smart's an excellent defender, but he's subpar at literally everything else (save for offensive rebounding).

Hes got the clutch gene and hes better in loose ball situations than anyone. Hes not a great passer, but he has good court vision in my opinion. Also, it seemed to me that at the end of the year he was finally getting into the paint while under control. Doing that consistently will be a key to upping his FG% and assist numbers etc. If he can do that more, while also upping his 3pt% to 35% he should become an OK offensive player. Which is all you need when he brings all the other stuff to the table.

This is homer stuff, largely. I get the love for his intangibles, but he lacks effective skills in many areas.

Yeah, Im for sure biased, he is my favorite player. That said, I dont think anything I said is false. He has hit big shots for us his whole short career. I dont think the clutch gene comment is unwarranted. Hes the best Ive seen in a while in loose ball situations, that seems fair. In the playoffs the game seemed to slow down for him a bit, that seems fair to me. The court vision one I suppose could be homeristic, but I still believe (obviously). Do you disagree with any of the other comments I made?

I dont disagree at all with your general idea that hes really limited. Not explosive enough to finish over length or quick enough with the handle to get himself a ton of clean looks. He obviously cant shoot and hes got no midrange game. Hes an elite defender but i think guys like IT would blow by him. He struggles finishing through traffic and his shot selection is awful.

[Ilikesports17]

A few points:

1)   We should be able to get excited about Rozier without denigrating Smart. Why is one’s progress a knock on the other? The way the game is played now, both of those guys could end up in the same backcourt as two guys that can both handle the ball and guard both backcourt spots. There’s a ton of examples like this in the league now. Anyway: you don’t need to put down Smart because you like Rozier, or vice versa.

2)   I really do not get posters’ inclination to dump on Smart. Have people been watching the games? The guy is already, in my opinion, one of the best backcourt defenders in the league. Defensively he is perfectly designed for the modern NBA, as a guy who can switch onto defending players of all sizes and abilities. By all accounts he’s a hard worker, has a leader’s personality, is good in the clutch, and has some serious “dog” in him, the type of attitude that KG brought to the team in 2007 that changed the culture of the whole franchise. His jump shooting has been poor, but other aspects of his game – for instance, how he runs the pick and roll – improved significantly from year 1 to year 2. Like I’ve said in the past, considering his defense, if he were to grow into even a middling offensive player he’d be one of the most valuable guards in the league.

3)   These guys are both just barely 22 years old. We have not seen Smart play since he was 21. The notion that these guys are EVEN CLOSE to being finished products, especially at a position that takes as much seasoning as point guard, is downright crazy. Shooting especially is something that can improve. Keep in mind that Tim Hardaway (senior, not junior) shot 27% from 3 his first year in the league, when he was 23 years old. His career 3 point percentage turned out to be 36%. For goodness sake, have some patience on these guys.

TP.

Im gonna thrust Jackson into this debate too. I love the kid, had a lotto grade on him. I hope he Rozier and Smart can all prove themselves in time for us to flip one of Smart Thomas Bradley before their contracts expire for good value.