Don't give up on Smart

[SHAQATTACK]

I got TOO much money invested in #36 apparel for that...

[Ilikesports17]

There may be a few Smart haters and Smart fanatics thrown in here and there, but I think most people generally agree on Marcus.

He is a solid passer, a very good defender, a high energy guy, and a leader with a penchant for big plays and clutch shots.

On the other hand, hes a miserable scorer and lacks the physical profile (not explosive, no natural elusiveness or handle) and natural scoring ability(touch, feel around the basket), and has a history of awful shot selection.

This lack of scoring ability and upside restricts what he can do for you but his leadership energy and defense make him a nice roleplayer.

Hes shown flashes of intelligent basketball that could make him much more valuable.

His ability to a. Improve his shooting and savvy around the basket and b. Play within his offense will determine whether he can be an elite role-player or a poor mans Tony Allen + point guard skills

[BitterJim]

You Cant measure Smarts contribution to this team by the Score Card or the 3 Ball percentage.. He is much more than that, always has been always will be..  He is Great as is, Can his shooting improve, sure.. but he is one of only a handful of players in the league who can effect winning despite the 1 for X...  Successful teams need guys like that to be successful.

Tell me why we won that Knicks game, what did Smart do at the end there to put it away? Let's say he goes 0 for X again that game. Are we winning this game?

Not sure what your argument is.

If Smart had missed 5 more shots thus resulting in us scoring ~10 less points, then yes we probably lose the game.

The point is that Smart makes winning plays and helps the team shot-making aside.

Smart took 2 bigtime charges and ran some of our best offense the whole game out of the post. He also hit a clutch shot, which he has seemingly dont a lot of in his career shooting percentages aside.

As I see it, the point is this. Smart is terrible at shooting and somehow thinks hes good. He will have games where he has a sub 20 fg%. In those games his ability to be a beast defensively, run the offense fairly well from the post or pick and roll, and make bigtime clutch plays and shots make it so he still helps the team or at least mitigates the negative impact his shooting has.

When he plays within himself and makes his shots he can be incredibly valuable and help the team immensely.

Well since you didn't know, I'm glad you were Smart enough.

Also didn't he hit the dagger three? Look man, Knicks had 3 guys scoring in the 20s, Smart HAD to hit some shots for us to win. Basketball isn't all putbacks and loose ball dives. Sometimes you gotta put the ball inside the hoop, you know to score and whatnot.

That point is obvious so I wasnt sure if you really felt the need to point it out.

Obviously when Smart hits shots hes better than when he doesnt. However, that doesnt mean he cant help the team win and be valuable when he doesnt hit shots.

Also, Smart left the game with 4:24 to go, up 11. We were outscored 14-3 He returns to the game with a minute left, nails a 3, Bradley steal, Horford block, game over.

Again, no one is arguing that 5-9 Smart is worse than 1-9 Smart. That point is asinine and irrelevant, the point is that 1-9 Smart can still be helpful to the team so give him patience and if he eventually wisens up on shot selection and adds a little savvy he can consistently be the weapon we saw on Christmas.

Smart's a good role player. I think even fans of opposing teams are starting to notice. He's great at one end of the floor, is our second best point guard plus he can light a fire under the team's butts during timeouts, who can't appreciate that? However, I think we can both agree that 1 for 9 Smart would not have been helpful in a high scoring game like this.

I think this is where the disagreement is.  I would say that he could still be helpful in that game if shooting poorly (especially since he would presumably have taken fewer shots if he wasn't making any).  Obviously he wouldn't have been as helpful, but I'd still rather have him out there than Rozier

C's have a stretch of games where they play a slew of olayoff caliber teams.

If they win any of those games with Smart not making 40% of his shots and he's playing 27+ mins, I'll give you a TP for every win.

I'll take that bet gladly, and give you a TP for every loss where Smart makes less than 40% of his shots and plays 27+ minutes (I think settling up at the end of the stretch would be easiest, since there's no way I'll remember after each game).  Does the next 20 games sound good?

I feel good about my chances, though, since we are 10-3 during games fitting that criteria this year (Source Note: AB, Rozier, and IT are also listed in this, sorting by name makes it easier to read)

[Tr1boy]

Its time

If the right offer comes our way

I mean if he was a FA , what is he worth in the open market? 6-8 million a year?

Too slow and unsure on the offensive end. Strong defender and hardworking. Has a place in the league.

[CelticGuardian]

You Cant measure Smarts contribution to this team by the Score Card or the 3 Ball percentage.. He is much more than that, always has been always will be..  He is Great as is, Can his shooting improve, sure.. but he is one of only a handful of players in the league who can effect winning despite the 1 for X...  Successful teams need guys like that to be successful.

Tell me why we won that Knicks game, what did Smart do at the end there to put it away? Let's say he goes 0 for X again that game. Are we winning this game?

Not sure what your argument is.

If Smart had missed 5 more shots thus resulting in us scoring ~10 less points, then yes we probably lose the game.

The point is that Smart makes winning plays and helps the team shot-making aside.

Smart took 2 bigtime charges and ran some of our best offense the whole game out of the post. He also hit a clutch shot, which he has seemingly dont a lot of in his career shooting percentages aside.

As I see it, the point is this. Smart is terrible at shooting and somehow thinks hes good. He will have games where he has a sub 20 fg%. In those games his ability to be a beast defensively, run the offense fairly well from the post or pick and roll, and make bigtime clutch plays and shots make it so he still helps the team or at least mitigates the negative impact his shooting has.

When he plays within himself and makes his shots he can be incredibly valuable and help the team immensely.

Well since you didn't know, I'm glad you were Smart enough.

Also didn't he hit the dagger three? Look man, Knicks had 3 guys scoring in the 20s, Smart HAD to hit some shots for us to win. Basketball isn't all putbacks and loose ball dives. Sometimes you gotta put the ball inside the hoop, you know to score and whatnot.

That point is obvious so I wasnt sure if you really felt the need to point it out.

Obviously when Smart hits shots hes better than when he doesnt. However, that doesnt mean he cant help the team win and be valuable when he doesnt hit shots.

Also, Smart left the game with 4:24 to go, up 11. We were outscored 14-3 He returns to the game with a minute left, nails a 3, Bradley steal, Horford block, game over.

Again, no one is arguing that 5-9 Smart is worse than 1-9 Smart. That point is asinine and irrelevant, the point is that 1-9 Smart can still be helpful to the team so give him patience and if he eventually wisens up on shot selection and adds a little savvy he can consistently be the weapon we saw on Christmas.

Smart's a good role player. I think even fans of opposing teams are starting to notice. He's great at one end of the floor, is our second best point guard plus he can light a fire under the team's butts during timeouts, who can't appreciate that? However, I think we can both agree that 1 for 9 Smart would not have been helpful in a high scoring game like this.

I think this is where the disagreement is.  I would say that he could still be helpful in that game if shooting poorly (especially since he would presumably have taken fewer shots if he wasn't making any).  Obviously he wouldn't have been as helpful, but I'd still rather have him out there than Rozier

C's have a stretch of games where they play a slew of olayoff caliber teams.

If they win any of those games with Smart not making 40% of his shots and he's playing 27+ mins, I'll give you a TP for every win.

I'll take that bet gladly, and give you a TP for every loss where Smart makes less than 40% of his shots and plays 27+ minutes (I think settling up at the end of the stretch would be easiest, since there's no way I'll remember after each game).  Does the next 20 games sound good?

I feel good about my chances, though, since we are 10-3 during games fitting that criteria this year (Source Note: AB, Rozier, and IT are also listed in this, sorting by name makes it easier to read)

Great, cool.

The stipulation is that it has to be against playoff teams. Not lottery bound teams, or teams middling around .500. The next 20 sounds a bit much. I'll reduce it to 4 key games.

So right off the bat,  tonight against the Grizz. The Cavs game coming up. Then the game against Utah, and lastly against Toronto. These are games that matter to us, and what better opportunity for Marcus to prove that his offense is not needed for us to get quality wins.

[Ilikesports17]

Its time

If the right offer comes our way

I mean if he was a FA , what is he worth in the open market? 6-8 million a year?

Too slow and unsure on the offensive end. Strong defender and hardworking. Has a place in the league.

"If the right offer comes our way"

not really going out on a limb there.

[RJ87]

There may be a few Smart haters and Smart fanatics thrown in here and there, but I think most people generally agree on Marcus.

He is a solid passer, a very good defender, a high energy guy, and a leader with a penchant for big plays and clutch shots.

On the other hand, hes a miserable scorer and lacks the physical profile (not explosive, no natural elusiveness or handle) and natural scoring ability(touch, feel around the basket), and has a history of awful shot selection.

That's probably the most frustrating thing about him. He's got such great defensive instincts, but he can then turnaround and jack up an ugly, flow disrupting 3 on the other end. Part of me wonders if that's a tendency that can be corrected or if that's just who he is.

The reality of it is that he's never been a terribly efficient offensive player - not even in his college days where he thrived on bully ball. What I'd like to see from is just a better reading of the game on the offensive end; don't fall into hero-ball tendencies, make the fundamentally right play and take what the defense gives you.

I still like him, but he's tradeable.

[spikelovetheCelts]

He had a good game and the cheerleaders came out Haha. Smart is a good role player. Maybe he can be more. No point in creating a thread. We already have enough smart threads. We're better off waiting for the year to end.

The only argument I have made is that Smart is nothing more than a roleplayer. I think that's pretty fair.

yeah that seems fair.

Obviously if God graces his right arm and he starts shooting 40% from deep we can reopen the Marcus Smart is a star narrative. However, for now he is anywhere from an OK to really good role-player primarily depending on how he is used and shot selection.

He works on his shot. He will master it. Many on CB dissed AB and man are they wrong. Smart works at his game and he will learn to shoot like Jason Kidd did. I think he will make and All-star team just as I said last year that AB would make one. If Korver can make on Smart can too.

[Ilikesports17]

He had a good game and the cheerleaders came out Haha. Smart is a good role player. Maybe he can be more. No point in creating a thread. We already have enough smart threads. We're better off waiting for the year to end.

The only argument I have made is that Smart is nothing more than a roleplayer. I think that's pretty fair.

yeah that seems fair.

Obviously if God graces his right arm and he starts shooting 40% from deep we can reopen the Marcus Smart is a star narrative. However, for now he is anywhere from an OK to really good role-player primarily depending on how he is used and shot selection.

He works on his shot. He will master it. Many on CB dissed AB and man are they wrong. Smart works at his game and he will learn to shoot like Jason Kidd did. I think he will make and All-star team just as I said last year that AB would make one. If Korver can make on Smart can too.

he easily could make an all star game or 2 as an elite role player on a really good team.

[vjcsmoke]

Kyle Korver is not a good comp because Korver is an elite outside shooter.  Has been pretty much his whole career.  Even so he never averaged much more than 10ppg.  And he didn't make his first all-star appearance till age 33. 

I don't think the fans here have the patience to wait 10 years for Smart to turn into an all-star.  They'll have cut bait looooong ago.

Not to mention Smart's true value stems from his defense first.  He's the complete opposite of Korver. 

Hopefully Smart has a career trajectory more like Avery Bradley.  He has good size for a point guard, but his lack of shooting ability is hurting us at times. 

The scary thing about Smart is that his percentages look horrendous, and his lack of shot selection is obvious.  If he'd just take more makeable shots and play within himself, we'd see that efficiency and shooting percentage go up.  But does he have the offensive basketball IQ to do it?

He had a good game and the cheerleaders came out Haha. Smart is a good role player. Maybe he can be more. No point in creating a thread. We already have enough smart threads. We're better off waiting for the year to end.

The only argument I have made is that Smart is nothing more than a roleplayer. I think that's pretty fair.

yeah that seems fair.

Obviously if God graces his right arm and he starts shooting 40% from deep we can reopen the Marcus Smart is a star narrative. However, for now he is anywhere from an OK to really good role-player primarily depending on how he is used and shot selection.

He works on his shot. He will master it. Many on CB dissed AB and man are they wrong. Smart works at his game and he will learn to shoot like Jason Kidd did. I think he will make and All-star team just as I said last year that AB would make one. If Korver can make on Smart can too.

[Ilikesports17]

Kyle Korver is not a good comp because Korver is an elite outside shooter.  Has been pretty much his whole career.  Even so he never averaged much more than 10ppg.  And he didn't make his first all-star appearance till age 33. 

I don't think the fans here have the patience to wait 10 years for Smart to turn into an all-star.  They'll have cut bait looooong ago.

Not to mention Smart's true value stems from his defense first.  He's the complete opposite of Korver. 

Hopefully Smart has a career trajectory more like Avery Bradley.  He has good size for a point guard, but his lack of shooting ability is hurting us at times. 

The scary thing about Smart is that his percentages look horrendous, and his lack of shot selection is obvious.  If he'd just take more makeable shots and play within himself, we'd see that efficiency and shooting percentage go up.  But does he have the offensive basketball IQ to do it?

He had a good game and the cheerleaders came out Haha. Smart is a good role player. Maybe he can be more. No point in creating a thread. We already have enough smart threads. We're better off waiting for the year to end.

The only argument I have made is that Smart is nothing more than a roleplayer. I think that's pretty fair.

yeah that seems fair.

Obviously if God graces his right arm and he starts shooting 40% from deep we can reopen the Marcus Smart is a star narrative. However, for now he is anywhere from an OK to really good role-player primarily depending on how he is used and shot selection.

He works on his shot. He will master it. Many on CB dissed AB and man are they wrong. Smart works at his game and he will learn to shoot like Jason Kidd did. I think he will make and All-star team just as I said last year that AB would make one. If Korver can make on Smart can too.

The point is that you don't need to be a world beater to make an all star game.

[Monkhouse]

Smart is Draymond Green guard size.

Put him around shooters, and two way players, and watch him thrive while filling up the stat sheet.

[BitterJim]

You Cant measure Smarts contribution to this team by the Score Card or the 3 Ball percentage.. He is much more than that, always has been always will be..  He is Great as is, Can his shooting improve, sure.. but he is one of only a handful of players in the league who can effect winning despite the 1 for X...  Successful teams need guys like that to be successful.

Tell me why we won that Knicks game, what did Smart do at the end there to put it away? Let's say he goes 0 for X again that game. Are we winning this game?

Not sure what your argument is.

If Smart had missed 5 more shots thus resulting in us scoring ~10 less points, then yes we probably lose the game.

The point is that Smart makes winning plays and helps the team shot-making aside.

Smart took 2 bigtime charges and ran some of our best offense the whole game out of the post. He also hit a clutch shot, which he has seemingly dont a lot of in his career shooting percentages aside.

As I see it, the point is this. Smart is terrible at shooting and somehow thinks hes good. He will have games where he has a sub 20 fg%. In those games his ability to be a beast defensively, run the offense fairly well from the post or pick and roll, and make bigtime clutch plays and shots make it so he still helps the team or at least mitigates the negative impact his shooting has.

When he plays within himself and makes his shots he can be incredibly valuable and help the team immensely.

Well since you didn't know, I'm glad you were Smart enough.

Also didn't he hit the dagger three? Look man, Knicks had 3 guys scoring in the 20s, Smart HAD to hit some shots for us to win. Basketball isn't all putbacks and loose ball dives. Sometimes you gotta put the ball inside the hoop, you know to score and whatnot.

That point is obvious so I wasnt sure if you really felt the need to point it out.

Obviously when Smart hits shots hes better than when he doesnt. However, that doesnt mean he cant help the team win and be valuable when he doesnt hit shots.

Also, Smart left the game with 4:24 to go, up 11. We were outscored 14-3 He returns to the game with a minute left, nails a 3, Bradley steal, Horford block, game over.

Again, no one is arguing that 5-9 Smart is worse than 1-9 Smart. That point is asinine and irrelevant, the point is that 1-9 Smart can still be helpful to the team so give him patience and if he eventually wisens up on shot selection and adds a little savvy he can consistently be the weapon we saw on Christmas.

Smart's a good role player. I think even fans of opposing teams are starting to notice. He's great at one end of the floor, is our second best point guard plus he can light a fire under the team's butts during timeouts, who can't appreciate that? However, I think we can both agree that 1 for 9 Smart would not have been helpful in a high scoring game like this.

I think this is where the disagreement is.  I would say that he could still be helpful in that game if shooting poorly (especially since he would presumably have taken fewer shots if he wasn't making any).  Obviously he wouldn't have been as helpful, but I'd still rather have him out there than Rozier

C's have a stretch of games where they play a slew of olayoff caliber teams.

If they win any of those games with Smart not making 40% of his shots and he's playing 27+ mins, I'll give you a TP for every win.

I'll take that bet gladly, and give you a TP for every loss where Smart makes less than 40% of his shots and plays 27+ minutes (I think settling up at the end of the stretch would be easiest, since there's no way I'll remember after each game).  Does the next 20 games sound good?

I feel good about my chances, though, since we are 10-3 during games fitting that criteria this year (Source Note: AB, Rozier, and IT are also listed in this, sorting by name makes it easier to read)

Great, cool.

The stipulation is that it has to be against playoff teams. Not lottery bound teams, or teams middling around .500. The next 20 sounds a bit much. I'll reduce it to 4 key games.

So right off the bat,  tonight against the Grizz. The Cavs game coming up. Then the game against Utah, and lastly against Toronto. These are games that matter to us, and what better opportunity for Marcus to prove that his offense is not needed for us to get quality wins.

I think that reduces it a bit too much - we should only be favored in the Jazz game. Teams over .500 (so top 5 in each conference plus the grizzlies and Jazz as you mentioned) would make more sense to me (and leave us with 9 of the next 20 games, although I think we should look at the teams' records after the group of games, since the Knicks are over .500 right now and I doubt that lasts)

[CelticsJG]

Its time

If the right offer comes our way

I mean if he was a FA , what is he worth in the open market? 6-8 million a year?

Too slow and unsure on the offensive end. Strong defender and hardworking. Has a place in the league.

Smart going to always have a place in the league. He is enforce/goon/glue guy

[KGs Knee]

Obviously you don't give up on a player with Smart's defensive ability, toughness, and ball handling in his third year.

I have no idea if he will ever become a better shooter, but if he does he's all-star material.

Good thing we didn't give up on a similar player. Bradley sure has planned out fantastic.

But if Smart can be part of a package that nets is a big fish, you probably don't want to pass that up. There's a chance he may always have his ceiling limited due to being behind IT/AB.