Marcus Smart can't develop properly with IT

[kozlodoev]

On possessions when he dribbles the ball more than 7 times, or when he has the ball for more than 6 seconds, his shooting percentage jumps up significantly. I'm a firm believer that if you are a threat in one area, you become better in a different area. In other words, if Smart was more of a threat to score, then the defense must help more which leaves others open for him to pass to.

That's not necessarily conclusive. On a possession where you dribble the ball more, you're more likely to be getting a layup -- which obviously skews your FG%.

This argument is more obvious if you think why he shots way higher than his average on 2-point shots with 0 dribbles.

That might be. It's inconclusive because I don't know how to break it down more. On top of that, he is probably more likely to be facing scrubs in blowouts if he is handling the ball that much.

But he also may be trying to create on a play where the offense has stagnated and the defense is set. There's just no way to tell.

It's inconclusive, but it does make sense seeing as he switched positions going into the NBA.

I mean, if you look at the other section, it's abundantly clear that he's better pulling up off the dribble than he is in catch-and-shoot. So that suggests he's more efficient with the ball than without.

The problem is that so far it has been a better offensive tactic to play him off the ball and keep him isolated from the offense than to put the ball in his hands.

[Donoghus]

I really don't think IT4 is the issue with Smart's development.  Sounds like excuse making to me. 

The problem with Smart has & always has been his inconsistency on the offensive.  His shooting woes are not attributable to IT4, his reluctance to drive to the lane is not attributable to IT4, his poor decision making at times is not attributable to IT4...

I mean, "c'mon"...   

[Bobshot]

I've always thought IT should come off the bench, but they decided to make him the "star." So they made him a starter and centerpiece. I think he's improved as a distributor as a starter--no longer forcing as many shots. He was used pretty heavily this year, and they got away with it--with no injuries. I don't know if that will happen again. He needs some help.

Smart is a guy who fits in 2 or 3 positions--along with Bradley and Crowder. They can be used interchangeably. None are ideal in terms of PG. I think they're counting on Rozier this year to play a lot more--at the 1. Taking the load off IT.

[Eja117]

If a guy has a veteran in front of him he's being blocked and can't develop.

If he doesn't he needs a vet to come in and show him the way.

Can't be both.

[Chris22]

Smart is not a point guard.

That's a problem, because he's not a SG or SF either.

I disagree. Smart is a two guard.

[mmmmm]

Ah yes, CBS playing IT over Smart is stunting his development, just as CBS' commitment to Bradley and Crowder is stunting Hunter and Young's development 

I'll bet that CBS' shortsighted focus on winning is going to lead him to play Horford over Mickey, too, dooming Mickey to never reach his potential as an MVP candidate just to get a few extra wins

TP

Extremely well crafted!

[rocknrollforyoursoul]

Marcus Smart is like a lot of "combo" guards Ainge has drafted—clearly not a natural point guard, but also not much of a shooter.

Though there have been improvements with Smart's offense, and I'm hoping he takes another step forward this season, I don't think he could ever reach IT's level of ball-handling, passing, or scoring. I also think IT has to keep starting unless there's a clear upgrade, which Smart isn't.

[CoachBo]

I really don't think IT4 is the issue with Smart's development.  Sounds like excuse making to me. 

The problem with Smart has & always has been his inconsistency on the offensive.  His shooting woes are not attributable to IT4, his reluctance to drive to the lane is not attributable to IT4, his poor decision making at times is not attributable to IT4...

I mean, "c'mon"...   

This.

I wish more people could get beyond their "favorite player," to what's good for the Celtics franchise.

[dannyboy35]

I don't think smart should ever have played pg ahead of IT but I do think reps at pg off the bench instead of turner who good chance was not going to be here long term just would have helped him. Playing Sully and ( a lesser offense) Jerebko over Olynyk was really irritating to me.

[dannyboy35]

Even if smart never played point I would have liked to see him handling the ball more but he just was mostly put in the corner. A historically bad shooter turned into a spot up 3 point shooter. But I'm happy to be proven wrong. I love the dude's effort.

[footey]

IT is by far our best offensive player, and deserves to start. Smart just did not earn right to start. If anything, he is competing with Avery at the other guard position. But we lose too much outside shooting if we were to bench Avery. 

Smart will get the minutes he earns. 

[kozlodoev]

Smart is not a point guard.

That's a problem, because he's not a SG or SF either.

I disagree. Smart is a two guard.

Someone who can't catch and shoot very well is not a great SG.

[A Future of Stevens]

I really don't think IT4 is the issue with Smart's development.  Sounds like excuse making to me. 

The problem with Smart has & always has been his inconsistency on the offensive.  His shooting woes are not attributable to IT4, his reluctance to drive to the lane is not attributable to IT4, his poor decision making at times is not attributable to IT4...

I mean, "c'mon"...   

This.

I wish more people could get beyond their "favorite player," to what's good for the Celtics franchise.

An argument can be made that investing in the next player is whats good for the franchise. IT4, while he is miles ahead on offense over marcus, is miles behind on defense. Also IT4 will be on the wrong side of his prime athletically when he wants us to "back the brinks truck up." Now in the current nba payment landscape this might not be terrible, but the reason IT is effective has to do with his quickness and athleticism for his size (not jumping necessarily.) These traits tend to decrease when you are on the wrong side of 30.

People were weary of signing 6'10 horford to a max deal for five years, and big men who can stroke it tend to stay valuable as they get slower and less lift because they are a big body worst case scenario. What happens when we are staring down the barrell of a 5 year /35mil a year contract to a 5'9 shoot first pg who will probably decline big time over that contract? I love the guy but using up huge portions of the cap on that runs contrary to every aspect of this savy rebuild.

[biggs]

Smart is not a point guard.

That's a problem, because he's not a SG or SF either.

Right? I still don't understand what his natural position is..cornerback? Seriously though, is he just TA 2.0?

[Donoghus]

Smart is not a point guard.

That's a problem, because he's not a SG or SF either.

Right? I still don't understand what his natural position is..cornerback? Seriously though, is he just TA 2.0?

He's a combo guard.  A bit 1, a bit 2, even a bit 3 (defensively). He's not traditional at any of those positions. Pigeonholing in into one slot is relatively useless.