Marcus Smart

He's obviously struggling shooting and scoring, it hasn't hurt us yet amazingly during this winning streak. Tonight's game might have been the worst in a long streak of bad shooting games in a row. His percentages are at an all time low.....I keep on thinking he's gonna snap out of this next game and then tonite was probably his worst game ever, now who knows. I'm sure he's a hard worker, but something is wrong.

Any ideas? I've loved the good Marcus, but this streak of inept offense shouldn't be happening in his 4th year, not like this....????

He's hitting his free throws. It's in his head. He's overthinking it. Get a sports psychologist or slow down on threes. Master the midrange, post ups, drives to the hoop. He could be a bit like young Wade bodying in easy layups. Tatum is deadly like McHale or Cedric Maxwell was the best. Baynes is awkward with that semi-Kareem sky hook. It looked good earlier in the year and before he broke Kyrie's face,

I'm not trying to be negative. It is what it is. Smart is obviously a defensive savant. I rave about his pg work.

But if Shane Larkin takes a leap and Rozier develops his handle, and Jaylen becomes very good, then Smart is not indispensable. It's just my opinion. Only Kyrie, Brown, Tatum, Horford and Hayward are tough to replace. That'll be a big five.

But don't fix it if it ain't broken. Theis is great. Ojeley shows real potential. Smart is a proven pro, better than Tony Allen imho. I'm just a realist. It's a side plot to the season. Irving will automatically resign in two years. Smart is up in the air because of his shooting?

I remember how many people wished that Danny could have somehow kept Tony Allen in the fold.  He had no outside shot, he had no handle, it seemed like a tragic adventure every time he had the ball in his hands on offense.  But he could defend.

IMO, Marcus Smart is better than Tony Allen.

Those who concentrate on one bad aspect of Smart's game should read the article in the MISUNDERSTOOD thread.  If that doesn't convince you that he is a very important piece to the Celtics puzzle, than nothing will.

We should remember the TA lesson.  A bird in the hand and all . . .

gyso

Re Smart last evening.

Certainly failed the eye test but ........

Praise given to our other Marcus... yet MORRIS was a -10  and Smart was a + 6, and who played more time with our starters?  Not sure but had to be close to even as Marcus Morris was a starter.

I was always told you can't play good D with out committing some fouls.... Smart was the only one on the team with more than 2. He had 4 and I know 2 of those were picking up a man that had beaten their man.  And at least 1 foul he committed sent a Net to the line where he missed both and we got the rebound.....no harm and in a way an extra possession.

and He was 4X4 from the line... statistically that is where we won this game. We made 12 more than them.

Nothing negative about TR and Baynes....they combined played about as much as Smart...and went a combined 0-9 from the field. They had 4 total rebounds....Smart had 5.  

No one here knows if he'll be back next year.  We can only make educated guesses .... I guess.

And while i'm bitchin a bit another thing that bugs me

The word consistant

What exactly is consistent?  If a guy scores 10 and a game later scores 20 is that consistent?  
Yet I read time and time this guy or the bench or some needs to be "more consistent."
Rather impossible to score about the same every game given matchups and opportunity.

As a team we are allowing 94.5 PPG yet last evening allowed 102.  Almost 7% more than "normal"

Not sure of the word I'd use to replace it but just getting a little tired of reading it.  
Players are what they are and to harp about a game here or there is IMHO a waste.

Geesh we have 13 wins in a row......not to many Celtic teams have ever done that. And we are still nowhere near where we could be in time.  Only 4 players back and so many new faces to blend in and then the ugly Hayward injury to boot... Horford missing a couple Tatum likewise, Iriving missing a game and now playing with a little bit of a handicap with the mask...yet 13-2.  

There are a lot of team in the NBA that would love our "problems" and "constancy" perhaps as many as 28 (not counting GS)

Bitch session is over

beat

I respect the opinions out here and certainly dont mean to whitewash the failings of Marcus - but the constant vacillation on a game by game basis, I love him - I hate him - he is indispensible - danny should trade him - isnt useful or fair.

I think many of the trepidations that are being expressed here are EXACTLY why DA didnt extend him prior to the season. He wanted to see if Smart grew or regressed this season and if he was worth 15 million per.

His shooting has not gotten better, but his leadership, court vision and calm demeanor has improved by leaps and bounds. His defense is as stout as ever, and this year he is accepting even the bad calls and walking away. I see major growth in terms of maturity - a true team leader who is always in the + on the +/- scale.

Way too early to judge but based on his projected salary, a guy like Smart will always have a place on my team.

mrkleen09 wrote:I respect the opinions out here and certainly dont mean to whitewash the failings of Marcus - but the constant vacillation on a game by game basis, I love him - I hate him - he is indispensible - danny should trade him - isnt useful or fair.

I think many of the trepidations that are being expressed here are EXACTLY why DA didnt extend him prior to the season.  He wanted to see if Smart grew or regressed this season and if he was worth 15 million per.

His shooting has not gotten better, but his leadership, court vision and calm demeanor has improved by leaps and bounds.  His defense is as stout as ever, and this year he is accepting even the bad calls and walking away.  I see major growth in terms of maturity - a true team leader who is always in the + on the +/- scale.

Way too early to judge but based on his projected salary, a guy like Smart will always have a place on my team.

Time for the old+ 1

beat

beat wrote:Re Smart last evening.

Certainly failed the eye test but ........

Praise given to our other Marcus... yet MORRIS was a -10  and Smart was a + 6, and who played more time with our starters?  Not sure but had to be close to even as Marcus Morris was a starter.

I was always told you can't play good D with out committing some fouls.... Smart was the only one on the team with more than 2. He had 4 and I know 2 of those were picking up a man that had beaten their man.  And at least 1 foul he committed sent a Net to the line where he missed both and we got the rebound.....no harm and in a way an extra possession.

and He was 4X4 from the line... statistically that is where we won this game. We made 12 more than them.

Nothing negative about TR and Baynes....they combined played about as much as Smart...and went a combined 0-9 from the field. They had 4 total rebounds....Smart had 5.  

No one here knows if he'll be back next year.  We can only make educated guesses .... I guess.

And while i'm bitchin a bit another thing that bugs me

The word consistant

What exactly is consistent?  If a guy scores 10 and a game later scores 20 is that consistent?  
Yet I read time and time this guy or the bench or some needs to be "more consistent."
Rather impossible to score about the same every game given matchups and opportunity.

As a team we are allowing 94.5 PPG yet last evening allowed 102.  Almost 7% more than "normal"

Not sure of the word I'd use to replace it but just getting a little tired of reading it.  
Players are what they are and to harp about a game here or there is IMHO a waste.

Geesh we have 13 wins in a row......not to many Celtic teams have ever done that. And we are still nowhere near where we could be in time.  Only 4 players back and so many new faces to blend in and then the ugly Hayward injury to boot... Horford missing a couple Tatum likewise, Iriving missing a game and now playing with a little bit of a handicap with the mask...yet 13-2.  

There are a lot of team in the NBA that would love our "problems" and "constancy" perhaps as many as 28 (not counting GS)

Bitch session is over

beat

if thats the way you feel thats fine, the teams defensive improvement is because the teams personnel is so much better, not just because of Smart. I'm not saying to discard him, but his lack of shooting is painful, the guy blows layups off of a steal routinely, negating the effort of the steal. I love hard nosed intangible role players, but to me his offense is perplexing and ugly to watch.

mrkleen09 wrote:I respect the opinions out here and certainly dont mean to whitewash the failings of Marcus - but the constant vacillation on a game by game basis, I love him - I hate him - he is indispensible - danny should trade him - isnt useful or fair.

I think many of the trepidations that are being expressed here are EXACTLY why DA didnt extend him prior to the season.  He wanted to see if Smart grew or regressed this season and if he was worth 15 million per.

His shooting has not gotten better, but his leadership, court vision and calm demeanor has improved by leaps and bounds.  His defense is as stout as ever, and this year he is accepting even the bad calls and walking away.  I see major growth in terms of maturity - a true team leader who is always in the + on the +/- scale.

Way too early to judge but based on his projected salary, a guy like Smart will always have a place on my team.

did I ever use the word hate? its just a fockin basketball game, nobody hates our players, if you don't think Smarts game is regressing at an alarming rate, your in denial.

And in another thread years ago the +/- stat was proved meaningless, a guy can go 0-6, 1-9 but if hes on the floor where 2 players are carrying the team in a zone, it won't matter. And this isn't about one game.

gyso wrote:I remember how many people wished that Danny could have somehow kept Tony Allen in the fold.  He had no outside shot, he had no handle, it seemed like a tragic adventure every time he had the ball in his hands on offense.  But he could defend.

IMO, Marcus Smart is better than Tony Allen.

Those who concentrate on one bad aspect of Smart's game should read the article in the MISUNDERSTOOD thread.  If that doesn't convince you that he is a very important piece to the Celtics puzzle, than nothing will.

We should remember the TA lesson.  A bird in the hand and all . . .

gyso

if Smart could shoot as well as Tony Allen, I'd be happy

He took 8 shots in 30+ minutes.  I can live with that.  Just wish he'd make 3 or more

As for the plus minus. You can disregard it fine. But it is out the and it says what it says

beat

cowens/oldschool wrote:
did I ever use the word hate? its just a fockin basketball game, nobody hates our players, if you don't think Smarts game is regressing at an alarming rate, your in denial.

Cow- with all due respect, not every post is about 'you', so when I use the word "hate" it is used as a general term to encompass some of the flip flopping on Marcus out here.

As for the rest, I am not in denial and no amount of pissing and moaning about Marcus is going to change my opinion after 15 games.  Maybe when we are into January or February, if he is still historically bad offensively - I may reconsider.  But I don't evaluate players like I check the weather.  I look at the totality of their work.

Interestingly this is coming up today - as there is a good article (with video examples) on CBS today
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0ahUKEwijlo7M_MDXAhUj0oMKHdgMDewQFgguMAE&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cbssports.com%2Fnba%2Fnews%2Fmarcus-smart-shooting-percentage-stats-boston-celtics-vs-golden-state-warriors%2F&usg=AOvVaw1EGb3-UHboUQpOw2DYpSfi

When Smart is on the floor, the Celtics outscore their opponent by 11.3 points per 100 possessions (roughly a game). That's 7.9 points per 100 possessions better than when he's off the court. In other words, the Celtics jump from a solid team to an elite team when Smart is on the court.

But that's obviously the defense, right? After all, Smart is an omni-defender who can match up with all five positions, a bull in a china shop. The Celtics' defense is 1.5 points per 100 possessions better with him on the floor. That's where the good play comes from, right?

Except ... here's the thing ... when Smart is on the floor, the Celtics have a 106 offensive rating. That's also second-best among rotation players, and 6.8 points better than when he's on the bench.

How is it that the the worst shooter in the league helps make the league's best team better on offense?

In some ways, he's like a poor man's Draymond Green, whom the Celtics face Thursday in the week's titanic battle of the two best teams in the league at the moment. Green is a better finisher but is a career 33 percent 3-point shooter. Like Smart, he's defined by his bullying, overwhelming defense, and like Smart, his sublime passing is often overlooked. Both operate as the emotional engines of their teams.

Given his defensive prowess and the way he provides an emotional energy to the team, it's clear, it doesn't matter how Smart shoots.

He just makes the Celtics better.

Love everything about Marcus Smart except his shooting.  That, right there, pretty much sums it up.  When you can love everything about a player except one thing, and the team is still winning while they are getting big minutes, that's a good player to have.

Yeah, I wish he had gone 3-8 for a still pathetic 37.5% last night too.

Marcus Smart is averaging 10.1fgas/game this year.  That is the most so far in his career.  That is the problem, in my opinion.  It's one thing to be a bad shooter.  It's ok to take shots just to keep the defense a little honest, but to UP your fgas to record levels when you are, and have always been, a bad shooter and are having the worst shooting season of your career (35.2% career-to-date, 28.1% this year) shows a complete lack of conscience and his role on the team.  He's not a designated shooter, he's not Gerald Green.  

He can post up almost anybody in the league who is not a 5.  That's what he should do.  He is is having the best assist year of his career.  That's what he should do.  He is having the worst shooting season of his career, including shooting 27.6% from 3 and 28.6% from 2.  That's what he should not do, not anymore than is necessary.  It really blows my mind he is shooting almost the same from 2 as from 3.


bob


.

mrkleen09 wrote:

cowens/oldschool wrote:
did I ever use the word hate? its just a fockin basketball game, nobody hates our players, if you don't think Smarts game is regressing at an alarming rate, your in denial.

Cow- with all due respect, not every post is about 'you', so when I use the word "hate" it is used as a general term to encompass some of the flip flopping on Marcus out here.

As for the rest, I am not in denial and no amount of pissing and moaning about Marcus is going to change my opinion after 15 games.  Maybe when we are into January or February, if he is still historically bad offensively - I may reconsider.  But I don't evaluate players like I check the weather.  I look at the totality of their work.

Interestingly this is coming up today - as there is a good article (with video examples) on CBS today
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0ahUKEwijlo7M_MDXAhUj0oMKHdgMDewQFgguMAE&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cbssports.com%2Fnba%2Fnews%2Fmarcus-smart-shooting-percentage-stats-boston-celtics-vs-golden-state-warriors%2F&usg=AOvVaw1EGb3-UHboUQpOw2DYpSfi

When Smart is on the floor, the Celtics outscore their opponent by 11.3 points per 100 possessions (roughly a game). That's 7.9 points per 100 possessions better than when he's off the court. In other words, the Celtics jump from a solid team to an elite team when Smart is on the court.

But that's obviously the defense, right? After all, Smart is an omni-defender who can match up with all five positions, a bull in a china shop. The Celtics' defense is 1.5 points per 100 possessions better with him on the floor. That's where the good play comes from, right?

Except ... here's the thing ... when Smart is on the floor, the Celtics have a 106 offensive rating. That's also second-best among rotation players, and 6.8 points better than when he's on the bench.

How is it that the the worst shooter in the league helps make the league's best team better on offense?

In some ways, he's like a poor man's Draymond Green, whom the Celtics face Thursday in the week's titanic battle of the two best teams in the league at the moment. Green is a better finisher but is a career 33 percent 3-point shooter. Like Smart, he's defined by his bullying, overwhelming defense, and like Smart, his sublime passing is often overlooked. Both operate as the emotional engines of their teams.

Given his defensive prowess and the way he provides an emotional energy to the team, it's clear, it doesn't matter how Smart shoots.

He just makes the Celtics better.

Insightful analysis in that article about the importance and effect of Smart being on the court, even with his terrible shooting. We don't want to let one aspect of his game overshadow all the other positives he brings to the team. I too wish that he somehow finds his way out of his shooting funk. As the saying goes, "There's nowhere else to go but up."  Let's not lose sight of the fact that the C's are on a winning tear and Smart is an integral part of the reason why. That's an affirmation of his contributions and not a denial of his shooting problems. We need to savor this run and enjoy the journey while it lasts. Is the glass half empty or half full? At the moment, I think it's 3/4 full. Thanks for sharing that article.

Oh I'm enjoying it and we have such a young team, its soo great, a dawn of a new era.

But it pains me to see brick after brick for how many games now???....and I love his defense, toughness, etc.

bobheckler wrote:Love everything about Marcus Smart except his shooting.  That, right there, pretty much sums it up.  When you can love everything about a player except one thing, and the team is still winning while they are getting big minutes, that's a good player to have.

Yeah, I wish he had gone 3-8 for a still pathetic 37.5% last night too.

Marcus Smart is averaging 10.1fgas/game this year.  That is the most so far in his career.  That is the problem, in my opinion.  It's one thing to be a bad shooter.  It's ok to take shots just to keep the defense a little honest, but to UP your fgas to record levels when you are, and have always been, a bad shooter and are having the worst shooting season of your career (35.2% career-to-date, 28.1% this year) shows a complete lack of conscience and his role on the team.  He's not a designated shooter, he's not Gerald Green.  

He can post up almost anybody in the league who is not a 5.  That's what he should do.  He is is having the best assist year of his career.  That's what he should do.  He is having the worst shooting season of his career, including shooting 27.6% from 3 and 28.6% from 2.  That's what he should not do, not anymore than is necessary.  It really blows my mind he is shooting almost the same from 2 as from 3.


bob


.

+1

I sure hope that I'm not considered a flip flopper nor a Marcus hater!

But I've never been too impressed with his game and have said so from th start.

He is an elite defender and is even better than than that in certain circumstances. He can be beaten and that fores others to cover for him.

He is not an elite point guard or ball handler IMO. He is a classic combo guard. He can play both positions and he has improved his decision making and execution. But there is a reason why Larking get's the important late game minutes and Smart is relegated to a position where his strengths can be utilized and his weaknesses' hidden.

TRo and Smart on the floor at the same time means that either Kyrie or Larkin needs to bring it up. Both can make good decisions but they are better if others carry the primary burden. Tro will always opt for his shot and Marcus has as good a chance as any to not finish the play either with a bad shot or a bad pass. When the clock is winding down their time has past and others need to look for that final shot. I'm sure that someone could produce a stat that shows Marcus having a higher percentage with fewer than 5 seconds on the clock but that isn't a product of skill but of determination.

Danny;s World has always been about how to solve an immediate problem, like having no cap space, Or a talented AND deep roster. One of the talking heads this morning was saying that Danny's big accomplishment was seeing the demise of PP and KG and then fleecing the Russian who didn't understand you can't just buy a championship.

He waited, he made minor deals. And he always looked to upgrade each position. He did that incrementally for years. And then he went for broke. He contracted with one of the elite free agents each of the past two years. He has had the number 3 pick those same two years. Now only the injury to GH has stopped this team from being considered as elite and championship ready team this year if not next. No one really doubts that the rebuild is over and the team is still a few years away from their prime.

Does that mean that more tweaking won't be done? Does recent history not show that perhaps it's not a good idea to mention Brinks and contract in the same sentence? Does that mean that if Danny thinks he can upgrade the team by moving TRo or Marcus or both, he won't give it serious thought?

It would be a lot easier to upgrade TRo. Marcus could get serous consideration for ALL Defense third team. Both players really need to make the most of this season. It's getting time for a raise. Or to make room for an even brighter future.

I think people are misreading those of us who wonder if Smart's returning. We all do it. We put words in other mouths.

There is something to the idea we are in another galaxy for team defense. Smart does deserve a lot of credit for that. Yes with the analogy of the 2008 team. We didn't keep Tony and Posey. We lost the overwhelming edge of a stacked roster.

It became what's wrong with Danny and Doc.

Morris and Smart are the kind of guys one can use to build a winning team, but are they indispensable? Would they be tough to replace?

I agree that sometimes these player topics take on a life of their own. The Rondo debates never ended. If Isaiah was still here, we'd be talking about him and Danny's looming decision.

Why didn't Oklahoma keep Harden? Are there are predictions on what Golden State may do over the next three to five years? How will they keep their players? How will they find future role players to maintain their run if there's no money left?

I am not watching Morris and Smart hoping they suck.

Smart has clearly regressed for shooting. It hasn't caught up to us yet, but in the playoffs it could become an issue. I saw Toronto on at least a few plays drop off of Smart giving him a wide open mid-range, the Rondo or Bradley two pointer. The Brandon Bass 18 footer.

Every player can be here today, gone tomorrow.

In a perfect world the salary cap wouldn't matter. We'd have Smart as a piece of the puzzle no matter what for ten more years.

Say New Jersey (oops, Brooklyn) or Philadelphia offers Marcus Smart $25 million/year?

Smart is similar to Knoblauch or Rondo. He is a great player except for a few obvious flaws. Chuck couldn't throw a baseball ten feet. Rondo figured out a midrange jumper to correct one flaw, then he couldn't hit a free throw and stopped driving to the hoop.

My concern with Morris was whether he'd have any issues if Brad decided to go for other players over him. He was assuming himself a starter and such and such. He's been a hothead and drama elsewhere. I was just pointing it out as something to watch for. It looks like I was wrong and he's buying in.

Morris is not really an issue because he is in the Crowder pay bracket.

Smart is up for a new contract. I think some of us are getting our ideas twisted around. If I could speak for those of us hating his trajectory on offense, the problem is his contract and the NBA structure. Oklahoma lost Harden. We might lose Smart. It's Danny's job to decide the future. He traded Perk for Jeff Green, so I don't think people should be surprised with what he does with Marcus.

Think about it. There is only so much money. Larkin is a cheap, effective backup for Kyrie. Rozier may have taken a leap as a ball handler. We have guys like Horford and Hayward who provide some pg skills from the front court.

We have Jaylen Brown who seems to be a solid shooting guard. Rozier is cheaper than Smart, at least right now, and can backup Brown.

We need to remember the dollar amounts are less important than the % of Cap Space, period. Some players who renewed this year were overpaid - next year a similar player will likely make less. That is the ebb and flow of contracts and cap changes.

At some point this season, we will be able to identify our core and who are complimentary players that are interchangeable for others if their salary becomes untenable.

This is the basis of any business, you slot in a number for your 6th, 7th, 8th man and that is there the discussion begins (or in the case of a team like the Patriots - where it ends)

This has literally nothing to do with his shooting - it has to do with what he does well and who else is out there in a similar price range. If you look at the market - Marcus is in the 10-14 million a year category. So it comes down to what else is out there at that price range and is that player more impactful than Smart. Austin Rivers makes 12 million dollars a year. Let that sink in for a minute.

If you think Alec Burks, Dion Waiters, Patty Mills, Iman Shumpert, Tony Snell or Terence Ross have more upside than Marcus - they you give that 12 million per to one of them.

I would take Marcus Smart over almost anyone in the 10-14 million a year category in the league. And that is the kind of math Danny Ainge needs to do.

From the game on thread:

cowens/oldschool wrote:

Phil Pressey wrote:Brown and Tatum making leaps is huge.I'm calling it right now. Tatum is going to be the new transcendent NBA star. He will be the next Kevin Durant/Lebron. Danny hit the jackpot.

Great year for the game, other young studs going for that position too, Porzingus, Greek Freak, Simmons and Embid....if he can separate himself from those talents, he will really have to earn it.

Yeah, some of those other guys make my crowning of Tatum as the next transcendent player perhaps a bit too bold.

He's definitely Pierce-like with a nice jumper and strong ability to get to the hoop. He reminds me of Durant, a tall smooth unstoppable force on offense. His long arms and BB IQ seem to show he will also develop a strong game on defense.

Marcus Smart is a luxury or soon to become one or is integral and the glue. He will never break the starting lineup without injuries. Jaylen Brown is our shooting guard.

Smart's ineptness at shooting is creating the debate topic. It's exactly like Evan Turner's Boston story. I agree with Rosalie and others that Turner became a great player for the second half of last year. He stopped turning the ball over so much. But then he got offered too much money from Portland.

This is all people are saying. Smart needs to start hitting his shots at a minimum of a mediocre rate or he might not be worth the money that could be thrown around.

This happens every year a player's contract is up. Many of us wonder what Danny is thinking and what he'll decide.

If Smart makes a leap or semi-leap at shooting, then I think he probably stays.

It doesn't mean anyone hates him or his game, but it's realism. It's being sober. Smart's contract is up. If it wasn't, none of us would be thinking this much about his lousy shooting.

I think he might have a breakthrough. There's still time. But when a guy is shooting 29% on twos and 28% on threes, it is an issue.

His free throw shooting could save him. He's got that back up to 77%. That gives him three straight years of solid free throw shooting.

He has the edge over Rondo in that he can drive to the hoop and not be afraid of getting fouled. If he can hit free throws, then he should be able to consistently hit from 15-18 feet.

His stats this year are terrifying especially since he went with a shooting coach and worked on it all Summer.

He needs to put it together. He hit threes at 34% his rookie year. He hit twos at 43% his second year. He was an 81% free throw shooter last year.

It's a small sample size for this season, but so far he gets a D+ grade for offense. If this continues, then he'll be sweating bricks at the trade deadline and have no clue what Danny is thinking for future years.

Smart is on the clock. It's how the NBA works.

beat,

Consistency is a big problem for most younger players, but I consider a guy consistent if he can score a certain amount on most nights.  Say, 10 for an example.

If he can get nearly 10 on most nights and then goes above 10 in other nights he is a pretty consistent scorer although not a great scorer.  The guys who average 10, but seem to get there by scoring 3 in one game followed by 17 in the next are not a consistent scorers, to me.  This last scenario was Kelly Olynyk for his entire career in Boston.  The guys who are so "up and down" are very difficult to cover for on the nights that they phone in their 3 point games.  Yes, in the end 3 and 17 is an average of 10, but the 3 can easily lose a game for your team.

Smart at 9.5 ppg at least is a pretty consistent 9.5.  He rarely has the 20+ game but also rarely has the 3-4 point games either.  His scoring consistency (even if his his shooting is frustrating) is still decent and easily adds to his overall game where he may be one of the toughest, hungriest and smartest team players around.

I want him to stay in Boston even if he never becomes even a "good" shooter because there is always a chance that he improves his shooting to go along with all of the other stuff he does at a very proficient level.

wideclyde wrote:beat,

Consistency is a big problem for most younger players, but I consider a guy consistent if he can score a certain amount on most nights.  Say, 10 for an example.

If he can get nearly 10 on most nights and then goes above 10 in other nights he is a pretty consistent scorer although not a great scorer.  The guys who average 10, but seem to get there by scoring 3 in one game followed by 17 in the next are not a consistent scorers, to me.  This last scenario was Kelly Olynyk for his entire career in Boston.  The guys who are so "up and down" are very difficult to cover for on the nights that they phone in their 3 point games.  Yes, in the end 3 and 17 is an average of 10, but the 3 can easily lose a game for your team.

Smart at 9.5 ppg at least is a pretty consistent 9.5.  He rarely has the 20+ game but also rarely has the 3-4 point games either.  His scoring consistency (even if his his shooting is frustrating) is still decent and easily adds to his overall game where he may be one of the toughest, hungriest and smartest team players around.

I want him to stay in Boston even if he never becomes even a "good" shooter because there is always a chance that he improves his shooting to go along with all of the other stuff he does at a very proficient level.

+1

Kwideclyde wrote:beat,

Consistency is a big problem for most younger players, but I consider a guy consistent if he can score a certain amount on most nights.  Say, 10 for an example.

If he can get nearly 10 on most nights and then goes above 10 in other nights he is a pretty consistent scorer although not a great scorer.  The guys who average 10, but seem to get there by scoring 3 in one game followed by 17 in the next are not a consistent scorers, to me.  This last scenario was Kelly Olynyk for his entire career in Boston.  The guys who are so "up and down" are very difficult to cover for on the nights that they phone in their 3 point games.  Yes, in the end 3 and 17 is an average of 10, but the 3 can easily lose a game for your team.

Smart at 9.5 ppg at least is a pretty consistent 9.5.  He rarely has the 20+ game but also rarely has the 3-4 point games either.  His scoring consistency (even if his his shooting is frustrating) is still decent and easily adds to his overall game where he may be one of the toughest, hungriest and smartest team players around.

I want him to stay in Boston even if he never becomes even a "good" shooter because there is always a chance that he improves his shooting to go along with all of the other stuff he does at a very proficient level.

Love your definition.  Best I have seen. Remember our big guy Baynes got like a career high 24 ish a couple games ago....and nothing last eve.

If nothing else Smart makes good conversation for debate!

+2

beat

I think you have to look at Smart for what he is; the team leader of a team off to a 13-2 start despite several games with players lost to injuries. To this point, this is Smart's team; he's the emotional/psychological/spiritual/whatever-you-want-to-call-it leader. Not Irving, not Horford, not any other player. That's worth something.

Maybe not worth enough by itself to keep him, so what else?

He's a very good point guard or wing and a playmaker. He can defend multiple positions. He can pass. He can score. He's not a consistent shooter. That's four of five skills needed from a guard that he does well.

For perspective, a baseball player can have five tools; hit for average, hit for power, throw, field, and run. Do four of those five and have a shot at the Hall of Fame. I'm not putting Smart in the HOF category, I'm saying he delivers on a significant number of skills we need. Enough to consider him a top talent at guard. Just like a baseball player displaying four of basball's five key skills is considered a star.

We now have other shooters, and will have another next year with Hayward. If we ship Smart out for a shooter, what is the likelihood that player has the other four skills Marcus possesses?

I would stick with Smart.

Right now we are riding an 11 game win streak - which generally offers up a great deal of team pluses - allowing for an everything is just fine attitude. Heck we are only 13 games into the season. I'll feel a lot more comfortable about the possibility of jumping on the Smart wagon in another 27 days or so.

swish