Smart Move: Keep or Say Goodbye to Marcus?

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
24,661
where I was last at
But here's the counter-counter:

If the 2020-21 NBA season is an "unprecedented mess" how do you explain the Knicks? Better leadership?
The counter-counter-counter is that the '19-20 knicks season ended for AI&P in March '20, as other teams played into Sept, (with just a couple of months to rehab relax, recharge) so they were well rested and healed and ready for the tough love and D that Thibs brought.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,478
Melrose, MA
There is also the argument that even if Marcus bounces back, the player he is has become less valuable to this team than a different player would be based on his strengths, weaknesses and physical profile.

If you told me I would get 19-20 Marcus every year for the next 4 if I signed him to a 3 year extension..... I probably still would like to trade him in an effort to get a bouncy 3/4 with 3pt shooting ability an above average D.

Marcus as his best is a defensive menace but undersized, a mediocre to poor 3pt shooter for a guard, a decent but unexceptional passer, a poor rebounder and turnover prone. He's a good player... he's just not what this team needs alongside it's switchy scoring wings and undersized scoring PG.
I disagree with the argument, though. You are basically saying "let's bring in someone with a more traditional kind of game." I'd rather have Smart's unique skillset, which is less redundant with other players.
But here's the counter-counter:

If the 2020-21 NBA season is an "unprecedented mess" how do you explain the Knicks? Better leadership?
The Knicks who skipped the bubble entirely and whose last 2019-2020 game was played on March 11?
The other thing about him, though, is that he takes a fair amount of hero-ball bad shots. Sometimes those are explainable (team struggling, shot clock, etc.) but it's another contributor to the eye-test perception about his offensive efficiency I suspect.
He does, but less so when the team is healthy and whole than when it is shorthanded.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,214
Fresh legs, development from young guys, 4 of the top 8 players are new this year, and they've had good injury/COVID luck.
The Knicks starting line-up of Randle, Barrett, Payton, Bullock and Noel is seventh overall in terms of games played together this year - 38. To contrast, the most common Celtics line-up this year appeared in just 11 games. The Knicks, despite Thibs rep, have had a very good season in terms of health. The Celtics did not.

Edit: Maybe this data doesn't convince anyone that the Celtics struggles are more of health/roster construction thing but it seems a lot more plausible than Marcus Smart alienating his teammates so much that it impacts their play or that the lack of a clear, deserving leader is the reason for their struggles.
 
Last edited:

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,949
Here's a shorter version of this thread. "Marcus is having a down year, let's ignore all of the various things that have gone uniquely wrong this year and attribute his struggles this year to the beginning of a permanent decline."

Maybe.

But it is all pure speculation. The counter-argument (the problem is the 2020-21 NBA season in all of its unprecedented mess) is just as strong.
Except for the fact that he's actually shooting better this year than he did last year (except for the decline in 3P% from 34.7% to 33.0%). He's shooting 39.8% from the floor this year, up from 37.5% last year. His TS% is better this year at .539 vs. .518 last year. His EFG% is up to .489 from .476.

I think we need to accept the fact that 2018-19 Marcus was the outlier, and this is the true talent we're getting on offense. This season would rank as his 2nd best shooting season of his career. If the guy would just stop shooting so much, facilitate more, and get back to the Tazmanian Devil he was on defense, he certainly has a role. I'm just not sure after 7 seasons, that leopard is changing his spots, and to me, dumping Kemba to start Marcus at point, during a contract year is a scary, scary thought.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,949
The other thing about him, though, is that he takes a fair amount of hero-ball bad shots. Sometimes those are explainable (team struggling, shot clock, etc.) but it's another contributor to the eye-test perception about his offensive efficiency I suspect.
The reason the eye test works for Marcus is that a lot of times, he's taking these hero ball shots because he creates them. I've talked about it dozens of times in game threads, but the ball seems to always find it's way to Marcus with under 10 seconds on the shot clock or at the end of a quarter, mostly because he's calling for it. And then when it finds his hands, it stops until he throws up a prayer. Most of the time, Marcus has plenty of time to find someone else, but it's tunnel vision. He sees 10 seconds on that clock, and he's taking the shot.
 

reggiecleveland

sublime
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2004
27,958
Saskatoon Canada
I mean... he's still not a good shooter.
It's more like a guy who came into the league putting up a .209 OBP like Franchy Cordero and now has a .304 OBP like Vazquez... that guy still sucks at getting on base and you'd want him to do better.
He is better than a .304ops equivalent. I like Franchy as the worst case scenario of Marcus the shooter. And a 20% 3pt shooter is a good transfer, but he has shot above 33% lately which is much better than a .304obp. There are more 40% 3pt shooters that .400 ops. So baseball Marcus would be a really good right side of the defensive spectrum guy more like .340-.350 OPB, in other words a very good player. WIth Marcus you can argue he is too high in the order (shoots too much) or that good pitching limits him (he only takes wide open shots so his % is inflated) or that his glove is not what it used to be, (declined a stopper on D) or he hts into too any double plays and gets stealing too much (bad decisions, turnovers) but he is passable shooter recently.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,680
But here's the counter-counter:

If the 2020-21 NBA season is an "unprecedented mess" how do you explain the Knicks? Better leadership?
Wouldn't an unprecedented mess of an NBA season be exactly the season you would expect the Knicks to secure a home court playoff series?
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,464
I disagree with the argument, though. You are basically saying "let's bring in someone with a more traditional kind of game." I'd rather have Smart's unique skillset, which is less redundant with other players.
That's fine, but it isn't the TL:DR you gave.
Generally though I disagree, unique skillsets are nice, but lacking key parts of the essential skills for a good player at your position mean you have to be truly elite elsewhere, also... it probably means your a 6th man, which puts a cap on what salary makes sense.

He is better than a .304ops equivalent. I like Franchy as the worst case scenario of Marcus the shooter. And a 20% 3pt shooter is a good transfer, but he has shot above 33% lately which is much better than a .304obp. There are more 40% 3pt shooters that .400 ops. So baseball Marcus would be a really good right side of the defensive spectrum guy more like .340-.350 OPB, in other words a very good player. WIth Marcus you can argue he is too high in the order (shoots too much) or that good pitching limits him (he only takes wide open shots so his % is inflated) or that his glove is not what it used to be, (declined a stopper on D) or he hts into too any double plays and gets stealing too much (bad decisions, turnovers) but he is passable shooter recently.
33-34% is not good for an NBA player, it's particularly not good for an NBA guard. There are 10 qualifying guards who shoot worse from 3 than Marcus (and only 3 at a higher volume per game), there are 80 qualifying guards who shot better than Marcus. He's in the bottom 15% of qualifiers at his positon in 3pt shooting. I'm not sure where that falls exactly on OBP, but I'd guess it is very low.
Marcus's shooting improved over his career, but so did the league as a whole. He's still one of the league's worst for his position and that is going to be an issue.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
That's fine, but it isn't the TL:DR you gave.
Generally though I disagree, unique skillsets are nice, but lacking key parts of the essential skills for a good player at your position mean you have to be truly elite elsewhere, also... it probably means your a 6th man, which puts a cap on what salary makes sense.


33-34% is not good for an NBA player, it's particularly not good for an NBA guard. There are 10 qualifying guards who shoot worse from 3 than Marcus (and only 3 at a higher volume per game), there are 80 qualifying guards who shot better than Marcus. He's in the bottom 15% of qualifiers at his positon in 3pt shooting. I'm not sure where that falls exactly on OBP, but I'd guess it is very low.
Marcus's shooting improved over his career, but so did the league as a whole. He's still one of the league's worst for his position and that is going to be an issue.
league average OBP this year is .311. A .304 OBP is probably better than 33-34% from 3. The NBA average from 3 is .367.

Plus with the position Smart plays, it would be like a .304 OBP from 1st base. A position you would expect above average production.
 

reggiecleveland

sublime
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2004
27,958
Saskatoon Canada
.
Marcus's shooting improved over his career, but so did the league as a whole. He's still one of the league's worst for his position and that is going to be an issue.
I agree.
The baseball comp concludes he is Omar Visquel, etc to justify his shots/abs. Fair to day he won't be gold glover in three years. And speaking of shortstops, does he have the Calmed Eyed intangibles we need?
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,124
Santa Monica
I also don't think Kemba's contract is that big an issue... he's still a good offensive player, and he's not a terrible defender, just a below average one, and there are only 2 years left.

I think Kemba vs. Marcus misframes the question in part because it frames Marcus as a starting PG option.... he shouldn't be. He's a SG if we're being generous, and undersized swing if we aren't. You can't plan a roster around a starting PG who can't stretch the floor, is a servicable distributor, turns it over a bunch and whose best attribute is his switch defense on strong 2-4 players.

I mean, I look at Kemba, and I see a player who is a much better shooter, better passer, turns it over far less on much higher usage, rebounds better (that's just embarrassing for Marcus), and is generally a much better offensive player. He's not as good a defender, but Marcus seems to be slipping on that end, particularly against PGs.... which is concerning if that's who you want him to play.
I'm not sure if there is a team that would add a 31yr old, fragile, defensive liability for 2 seasons @ $73.6MM? Maybe the OKC Rehab Center? The flat cap isn't helping Danny's cause.

Kemba is built to be a ball-dominant #1/2 option on offense and has been better in that role over the last month. BUT a healthy Celtic team makes him a #3/4 off-ball option (Fournier better off-ball shooter?). That wastes Kemba's offensive talents, especially when you add in his bad defense + contract. If they do end up keeping KW, making him a Lou Williams/30mpg player may be the best way to hide his defense, be a ball-dominant #1/2 option PG, and not overexert his knee.

BTW any defensive stat that shows Kemba is "just a below avg" defender doesn't take into account how NBA playoff basketball works. Especially when opposing coaches have the time to gameplan. We just got a small taste of it when Spolstra had everyone attack Kemba out of the post. Plus where's the defensive metric for defense in constant rotation to cover for Kemba? It would also be nice if the 4 other Celtic defenders didn't have to spend so much energy covering for Kemba all game.

also note: Kemba took the first month off to get an offseason and rested during back-to-backs this season. Kemba is only getting more fragile with a degenerative knee (arthritic?) and the rest of the league knows it.

My previous post wasn't a 2020-21 Smart vs Kemba comparison. It's just easier to move Smart (moneywise) for an asset. I also don't want contract year Marcus launching for $$$.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,464
I was talking more in terms of whether having him on that salary really hurts you, not if you can trade him. I think it is basically irrelevant unless the owner is going to get very cheap very fast. Ducking under the line this year means Kemba's deal is an overpay, but without escalators it's just money, and if you needed to get of it after next year, plenty of teams will take his expiring. Worse contracts than Kemba's have been traded, especially in walk years.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
31,212
I agree.
The baseball comp concludes he is Omar Visquel, etc to justify his shots/abs. Fair to day he won't be gold glover in three years. And speaking of shortstops, does he have the Calmed Eyed intangibles we need?
Yes, that's a pretty reasonable comp. Sometimes---as with Vizquel and Ozzie Smith's case---they hit better as their career goes on and the value goes well up. Many times, that doesn't happen. And so I think that brings us back where we started with Marcus in that either he needs to produce more offensively or maintain exceptional defense (at least, the pre-2021 version of him) for him to be a material asset. I think many people will land in different places on that, and there's reason to believe either, imo, is realistic.
 

the moops

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 19, 2016
4,700
Saint Paul, MN
Plus with the position Smart plays, it would be like a .304 OBP from 1st base. A position you would expect above average production.
True, but with the other stuff Smart does it would be like a low OBP 1B who steals 20 bases, can play all 4 infield positions, and is the emergency backup catcher
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
True, but with the other stuff Smart does it would be like a low OBP 1B who steals 20 bases, can play all 4 infield positions, and is the emergency backup catcher
All stuff that is mostly useless because a low OBP 1B who plays all other infield positions plays those positions like crap, which is why he's a 1b.

It's like they get credit for being able to do things even if they aren't good at such things. But at least they can do it! Michael Chavis isn't good.

The defense analogy doesn't work with Smart but he's heavily flawed in other areas that he ends up not being all that better than the UI (10th guy). Of course Smart's best role is 6th man so...
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,464
True, but with the other stuff Smart does it would be like a low OBP 1B who steals 20 bases, can play all 4 infield positions, and is the emergency backup catcher
Not really no. He's really like an excellent defensive 1B, who can play good defense at 2nd, SS, and OF in a pinch but can't hit for shit. Which means he's really just a utility bench player.

Edit- Marcus is GOOD at one thing... defense. He's acceptable at a few.. passing, getting fouled, FT%. He's below average at a few... TOVs notably, and he's just bad at 2... rebounding and shooting 3s.
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
8,160
I'm far from an expert, but I feel like Smart's #1 skill (being able to credibly guard most players in the league) will not age well with regards to being able to stay with quicker players. It already seems like that faded this year, and then he's left with being able to guard players that are considerably taller than him. Which, he has often been able to do, but his utility as a 6' 3" power forward defensive specialist seems limited, especially for someone who doesn't rebound particularly well.

It's amazing how Smart seems to be able to will himself to come up with incredibly great defensive plays at key moments - a huge steal or offensive foul drawn or whatever in clutch moments. But, my impression is that he isn't doing that all game long. Heck, in much fewer minutes, Nesmith seems to be doing that kind of stuff more regularly. On the flip side, Smart seems to also come up with some really boneheaded plays as well - terrible fouls, turnovers, his clutch shots seem to just as often stab the Celtics in the back as they are a dagger to the heart of the other team.

Overall, I just don't think his skill set is that complementary to the Js. He doesn't have the shooting to create the space that they need, and while I think he is an above average passer, it's just not enough.
 

ElcaballitoMVP

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 19, 2008
3,932
I'm far from an expert, but I feel like Smart's #1 skill (being able to credibly guard most players in the league) will not age well with regards to being able to stay with quicker players. It already seems like that faded this year, and then he's left with being able to guard players that are considerably taller than him. Which, he has often been able to do, but his utility as a 6' 3" power forward defensive specialist seems limited, especially for someone who doesn't rebound particularly well.

It's amazing how Smart seems to be able to will himself to come up with incredibly great defensive plays at key moments - a huge steal or offensive foul drawn or whatever in clutch moments. But, my impression is that he isn't doing that all game long. Heck, in much fewer minutes, Nesmith seems to be doing that kind of stuff more regularly. On the flip side, Smart seems to also come up with some really boneheaded plays as well - terrible fouls, turnovers, his clutch shots seem to just as often stab the Celtics in the back as they are a dagger to the heart of the other team.

Overall, I just don't think his skill set is that complementary to the Js. He doesn't have the shooting to create the space that they need, and while I think he is an above average passer, it's just not enough.
I think your last line is the most important in your entire post and the one I agree with most. If the choice is between Smart or Fournier, I think you've got to go with Fournier. If the C's could move Kemba to keep Fournier, I could still see a role for Smart on the team. He's still a valuable 6th man. But he's not a great fit with the J's and Danny is going to have to decide how he can best improve this roster. Sending Marcus to a contender in the West with other pieces going out in a 3 team deal to get back a player Danny wants could be his best option to do just that.
 

ManicCompression

Member
SoSH Member
May 14, 2015
1,352
Is Marcus really that good at defense? He's impressive when he gets posted up by bigger players and he can show off his strength, but people don't post up that much anymore so it's not really all that helpful. He's not some Simmons-level disruptor who can overwhelm a perimeter oriented offensive player. He's not big enough to be effective against the league's stronger wings like Kawhi. I don't get the sense that he slows quicker guards down when I watch him and that feels like a consistent gripe from the board over the last couple of years. Am I missing something regarding his defense? Could we not replace 90% of it?

He's a pest and annoyance and he's fun to root for when he's on your team. He's a good defender, but I don't think he adds so much to the team on that side of the ball that it makes up for his positionally below average shooting, decision making, and size (since his offensive limitations make him a two). As much as I like his mentality, it feels like it's gotten a bit stale - the effort on this team has sucked this year. That's not Marcus' fault but it doesn't feel like he's helping the situation. At the beginning of the year, I would've wanted Marcus to be a Celtic for life, but I'm at the point where I'd rather some other team make the mistake of his next contract and hopefully get a decent asset in return.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,464
Is Marcus really that good at defense? He's impressive when he gets posted up by bigger players and he can show off his strength, but people don't post up that much anymore so it's not really all that helpful. He's not some Simmons-level disruptor who can overwhelm a perimeter oriented offensive player. He's not big enough to be effective against the league's stronger wings like Kawhi. I don't get the sense that he slows quicker guards down when I watch him and that feels like a consistent gripe from the board over the last couple of years. Am I missing something regarding his defense? Could we not replace 90% of it?

He's a pest and annoyance and he's fun to root for when he's on your team. He's a good defender, but I don't think he adds so much to the team on that side of the ball that it makes up for his positionally below average shooting, decision making, and size (since his offensive limitations make him a two). As much as I like his mentality, it feels like it's gotten a bit stale - the effort on this team has sucked this year. That's not Marcus' fault but it doesn't feel like he's helping the situation. At the beginning of the year, I would've wanted Marcus to be a Celtic for life, but I'm at the point where I'd rather some other team make the mistake of his next contract and hopefully get a decent asset in return.
this year he hasn't been but the previous 3 or so he's been widely recognized both by tape guys and stats as an elite defender. He's very good at a lot of things across a wide range of opponents from 1-4.
Could we replace it.. probably not, but we also probably don't really need to. If we could get a guy who can defend 1-3 well with our roster it would give you most of what Marcus does.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
31,212
The biggest difference defensively I see this year is he’s a half step slower, and that means he struggles to stay in front of 1s and 2s. That’s a big hit to his value. I have no idea if that’s conditioning, nagging injuries, or age and hope the Celts do.

I agree he was an elite defender the last couple of years, both on ball and within team concept. We need that guy back.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,478
Melrose, MA
At the beginning of the year, I would've wanted Marcus to be a Celtic for life, but I'm at the point where I'd rather some other team make the mistake of his next contract and hopefully get a decent asset in return.
Unquestionably he has had a bad (compared to his recent performance) year. But it strikes me as flckle to do a complete 180 on anyone because of one bad year in demonstrably poor circumstances.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,680
It's amazing how Smart seems to be able to will himself to come up with incredibly great defensive plays at key moments - a huge steal or offensive foul drawn or whatever in clutch moments. But, my impression is that he isn't doing that all game long. Heck, in much fewer minutes, Nesmith seems to be doing that kind of stuff more regularly. On the flip side, Smart seems to also come up with some really boneheaded plays as well - terrible fouls, turnovers, his clutch shots seem to just as often stab the Celtics in the back as they are a dagger to the heart of the other team.
The hope is that Never Google takes over as the third option and that Nesmith takes a big jump forward over the summer, so that Marcus can go back to the sixth man/Swiss Army knife role that he excels at. If Boston can re-sign Fournier and Nesmith builds on his play then Smart will be doing less on offense and have more energy to play D.
 

bakahump

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 8, 2001
7,522
Maine
Seems silly to focus on Smarts 33% as opposed to Possible 36% on 3s.
More importantly is he going be a NET POSITIVE Moving forward.
Declining Defense.
A Body trending more towards my 50 yo fat ass
"attitude" and or a Perceived lack or bad leadership.
Never a Great passer (though admittedly one of the better on a bad passing team).

I think the end result is unless Marcus gets Much closer to 40% and becomes a true knock down corner man who can still play average D then he will be net negative. And I am not even remotely certain on the first and skeptical about the 2nd part.

And for that reason I am out.
 

ragnarok725

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 28, 2003
6,364
Somerville MA
I've always thought Smart was the type of player championship teams need. He was perfectly cast as the 6th man who could come of the bench, give some energy or provide lockdown D on a few different positions. He seemed best at 20-24 minutes a game. You accept some bad shot choices on occasion because the positives outweigh that. I don't know if starting him has ruined him or he feels he needs to overly fill a leadership void, but he looks like a drag on the team more than an asset right now. If they think they can revert him back to the role he's mostly had I would be in favor of hanging on to him. If that will cause him to be a detriment in the locker room I'd get what they can for him and move on.
This is exactly right, I think. I'm not optimistic that Smart would be interested in going backwards.
 

ManicCompression

Member
SoSH Member
May 14, 2015
1,352
Unquestionably he has had a bad (compared to his recent performance) year. But it strikes me as flckle to do a complete 180 on anyone because of one bad year in demonstrably poor circumstances.
"Fickle" makes it seem like a randomly generated opinion rather than coming to grips with reality. Marcus is probably not going to age well, particularly given how much he throws his body around. The eccentricities of his game - having a point guard's body, but unable to shoot well or run an offense consistently though able to defend multiple larger positions - make his margin of error razor thin. If he's not going to be above average at guard things, then he has to be amazing at all the other stuff we love him for. Is he going to deliver that over the course of his next contract? I wouldn't want to put $60 million over 4 years on it.

If, as @nighthob mentions, Fournier and Nesmith (and maybe Langford) eat into his minutes so Marcus can be a super sub, then sure, he can be helpful next year, but it also says a lot about his value to the team. We've seen GH and others walk away for essentially nothing. Might as well try to get something of value while Marcus is still on a contract that *he thinks* underpays him.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,478
Melrose, MA
"Fickle" makes it seem like a randomly generated opinion rather than coming to grips with reality. Marcus is probably not going to age well, particularly given how much he throws his body around. The eccentricities of his game - having a point guard's body, but unable to shoot well or run an offense consistently though able to defend multiple larger positions - make his margin of error razor thin. If he's not going to be above average at guard things, then he has to be amazing at all the other stuff we love him for. Is he going to deliver that over the course of his next contract? I wouldn't want to put $60 million over 4 years on it.
If you honestly wanted him to be a Celtic for life 6 months ago, and you are now writing him off as a has been, then I stand by fickle.
 

ManicCompression

Member
SoSH Member
May 14, 2015
1,352
If you honestly wanted him to be a Celtic for life 6 months ago, and you are now writing him off as a has been, then I stand by fickle.
I didn't call him a has been. I said that I want to avoid paying him when he becomes a has been, which could come earlier than projected if he won't be an average shooter like he was the last couple of years.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,680
If, as @nighthob mentions, Fournier and Nesmith (and maybe Langford) eat into his minutes so Marcus can be a super sub, then sure, he can be helpful next year, but it also says a lot about his value to the team. We've seen GH and others walk away for essentially nothing. Might as well try to get something of value while Marcus is still on a contract that *he thinks* underpays him.
Honestly if Nesmith makes a leap and Fournier re-signs the guy without a role is Kemba.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,464
Honestly if Nesmith makes a leap and Fournier re-signs the guy without a role is Kemba.
He's still the best (only) PG on the team, he's the best facilitator and turns the ball over very infrequently. Marcus is a combo guard at best, PP is a small 2.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
The biggest difference defensively I see this year is he’s a half step slower, and that means he struggles to stay in front of 1s and 2s. That’s a big hit to his value. I have no idea if that’s conditioning, nagging injuries, or age and hope the Celts do.

I agree he was an elite defender the last couple of years, both on ball and within team concept. We need that guy back.
Tearing your calf in the middle of the season is never a good thing when it comes to retaining your speed/quickness upon return. Smart has always struggled defending quick 1’s which goes back to when he entered the league but that will never be his primary role. Defensively he’s always been best defending 3’s who he can muscle rather than 1’s and 2’s who can be quicker than him.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
12,001
Unquestionably he has had a bad (compared to his recent performance) year. But it strikes me as flckle to do a complete 180 on anyone because of one bad year in demonstrably poor circumstances.
Couldn't you have applied similar logic to IT in the summer of 2017 (sub out "one bad year" for "one late-season injury")?

I'm not saying that the situations are identical, nor am I saying that the Celtics should get rid of Marcus (although I probably lean that direction). My point is that, when dealing with what could be injuries/aging/permanent declines, you sometimes have to make what look like pretty extreme/rapid decisions.

It has nothing to do with being "fickle".
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,478
Melrose, MA
Couldn't you have applied similar logic to IT in the summer of 2017 (sub out "one bad year" for "one late-season injury")?

I'm not saying that the situations are identical, nor am I saying that the Celtics should get rid of Marcus (although I probably lean that direction). My point is that, when dealing with what could be injuries/aging/permanent declines, you sometimes have to make what look like pretty extreme/rapid decisions.
These situations are not remotely comparable. 'Not identical' is a massive understatement. The Thomas situation was not in any way related to subpar play - it was about an injury recognized at the time to be career threatening. And it was also about Thomas' public salary demands.

He's 26, isn't demanding that anyone back up the Brinks truck, and people want to write him off immediately because it is a bad year and someone needs to be blamed for it.
He also needs shots, and there's still only one basketball.
Because Marcus takes a few very noticable bad shots, people don't really appreciate that he doesn't really shoot all that much.

Celtic regulars who take more shots per 36 minutes than Smart (11.6): Tatum (20.6), Brown (20.0), Walker (17.8), Fournier (12.9*), Pritchard (11.7)

And I would guess, if the breakdown was available, that Smart would take fewer shots when the shooters on the team were healthy than when one or more of them was out injured, as has been the case a lot this year. The season he took the fewest shots (2018-2019, 9.5 per 36) was the season in which he had the most proven talent around him: Irving (20.2), Tatum (15.2), Brown (14.9), Morris (14.5), Rozier (13.4), Hereford (13.2), Hayward (12.3).

For Smart's career he takes 11 shots per 36, which is basically a "pass first PG" number of shots. Noted pass first PG Rajpn Rondo takes... 10.8 shots per 36, never more than 12.6 or fewer than 8.8.

*Fournier typically takes more shots than this, but he didn't shoot much during his first few games back from Covid.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,387
There's a lot to be said on either side of this debate. Smart still brings some real positives, but it's also hard to overlook the negatives. I think Danny absolutely should do his due diligence to see what the market is for Smart and Kemba. Smart's got one more year left at very reasonable money ($13.8m) and for a team that needs defensive help at the guard position, but already has good scoring, then Smart might be a guy that puts them over the top. Boston would need to get some equivalent salary back, of course. And I think the idea would be to keep Fournier, and you already have Nesmith, and between the two of them you could get 80% of Smart's defense, but a lot better offense.

One team that comes to mind is Portland. Not a good defensive team, they have lots of good offense. The trade I'd like to make is Smart for Nurkic. The salaries line up and the NBA trade machine says it's good. Now Nurkic is probably more valuable than Smart, so Boston would need to throw in some stuff to make this work. But you can work with that. I don't know how much else Boston would need to throw in there, but Portland really could use a guy like Smart, and they're close to being a contender now. They'd need to replace Nurkic at center, so maybe the Celtics expand the deal and throw in TT to give them a big to replace Nurkic. But that throws the salaries off so Portland would need to include another player or two to make it work. But something like that would be what I'm looking for if I'm Danny.

But in the end, I really think Smart is going to be here next year and maybe beyond.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,478
Melrose, MA
There's a lot to be said on either side of this debate. Smart still brings some real positives, but it's also hard to overlook the negatives. I think Danny absolutely should do his due diligence to see what the market is for Smart and Kemba. Smart's got one more year left at very reasonable money ($13.8m) and for a team that needs defensive help at the guard position, but already has good scoring, then Smart might be a guy that puts them over the top. Boston would need to get some equivalent salary back, of course. And I think the idea would be to keep Fournier, and you already have Nesmith, and between the two of them you could get 80% of Smart's defense, but a lot better offense.

One team that comes to mind is Portland. Not a good defensive team, they have lots of good offense. The trade I'd like to make is Smart for Nurkic. The salaries line up and the NBA trade machine says it's good. Now Nurkic is probably more valuable than Smart, so Boston would need to throw in some stuff to make this work. But you can work with that. I don't know how much else Boston would need to throw in there, but Portland really could use a guy like Smart, and they're close to being a contender now. They'd need to replace Nurkic at center, so maybe the Celtics expand the deal and throw in TT to give them a big to replace Nurkic. But that throws the salaries off so Portland would need to include another player or two to make it work. But something like that would be what I'm looking for if I'm Danny.

But in the end, I really think Smart is going to be here next year and maybe beyond.
Taking on a big with that injury history is a massive risk - and to some degree it would represent the writing off of Rob Williams. Between Marcus Smart and Jozef Nurkic, both the same age, I don't think Smart is the one whose future is more in question for health reasons (not that you have made a health argument here, but others have in this thread).
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,387
Taking on a big with that injury history is a massive risk - and to some degree it would represent the writing off of Rob Williams. Between Marcus Smart and Jozef Nurkic, both the same age, I don't think Smart is the one whose future is more in question for health reasons (not that you have made a health argument here, but others have in this thread).
Its not a huge risk because Nurkic only has one more year left on his contract. And as much as I’d like a better player in return that’s more foolproof, you’re not going to get tons back for Smart. And the Celtics do need another quality big.

But let’s be honest...none of the trade ideas ever offered in SOSH come to be.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,464
He also needs shots, and there's still only one basketball.
Kemba's need for shots (though it's overblown, you can have an awful lot of guys get shots in an NBA season) doesn't change that despite the shots he takes he's still the only PG level distributor in terms of combining passing with taking care of possession.
I'd rather see them find a way to manage Kemba's shots than see more of the disaster that is our offense when we have nobody we can trust to run the offense without turning it over. There is a reason that the on/offs show Kemba as making our offense much better (including lower TOVs and higher AST), it's not mostly that he's scoring, it's that the offense actually runs correctly.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,478
Melrose, MA
Speaking of ON/OFF, anyone care to guess who the top 3 Celtic regulars are?

1. Tatum: Team +7.8, Opponent +3.3 (negative is better), Net +4.5
2. The Much Maligned Marcus: Team, +3.3, Opponent, -0.2, Net +3.5
3. Walker: Team +3.9, Opponent: +1.2, Net +2.8

Theis was a +1.5; no current regular other than the three above came anywhere near that level.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
Speaking of ON/OFF, anyone care to guess who the top 3 Celtic regulars are?

1. Tatum: Team +7.8, Opponent +3.3 (negative is better), Net +4.5
2. The Much Maligned Marcus: Team, +3.3, Opponent, -0.2, Net +3.5
3. Walker: Team +3.9, Opponent: +1.2, Net +2.8

Theis was a +1.5; no current regular other than the three above came anywhere near that level.
How many regulars are there?
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,478
Melrose, MA
How many regulars are there?
For the above, my definition of 'regular' was 1) still on the team, 2) at least 600 minutes played OR named 'Evan Fournier'. So 11: Tatum (+4.5), Smart (+3.5), Walker (+2.8), Brown (+0.8), Thompson (+0.1), Pritchard (+0.1), Nesmith (-0.2), Rob W (-0.8), Fournier (-1.0), Ojeyele (-1.6), Grant W (-3.2).

A bit different if looking at the cleaning the glass version of this stat, which eliminates garbage time and heave situations: Tatum (+5.1), Smart (+4.0), Walker (+3.2), Brown (+1.8), Pritchard (+1.3), Rob W (+0.1), Fournier (-0.1), Thompson (-0.7), Ojeyele (-2.3), Nesmith (-2.5), Grant W (-3.2). And just for fun: Mo Wagner (-39.4).
 

chilidawg

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 22, 2015
5,934
Cultural hub of the universe
For the above, my definition of 'regular' was 1) still on the team, 2) at least 600 minutes played OR named 'Evan Fournier'. So 11: Tatum (+4.5), Smart (+3.5), Walker (+2.8), Brown (+0.8), Thompson (+0.1), Pritchard (+0.1), Nesmith (-0.2), Rob W (-0.8), Fournier (-1.0), Ojeyele (-1.6), Grant W (-3.2).

A bit different if looking at the cleaning the glass version of this stat, which eliminates garbage time and heave situations: Tatum (+5.1), Smart (+4.0), Walker (+3.2), Brown (+1.8), Pritchard (+1.3), Rob W (+0.1), Fournier (-0.1), Thompson (-0.7), Ojeyele (-2.3), Nesmith (-2.5), Grant W (-3.2). And just for fun: Mo Wagner (-39.4).
I find Tatum and Smart both infuriating to watch, but it turns out everyone else is worse.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
New agent for Marcus:
View: https://twitter.com/GlushonSM/status/1393234839814348800


Same agent Jaylen signed with before he re-signed in BOS.

Probably means nothing, just getting in the new agent before any extension discussions.
He also could have a guy in place that he trusts to control the trade market and his future destination. The reports were that Smart was bothered by the rumors at the deadline and that lack of control could have played a part in ditching his representation.
 

TripleOT

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2007
7,758
The Celtics need to build around Tatum and Brown, who are two of the most frequent in the league in driving to the basket. If the Celtics are going to invest $16-20m a year in complementary players, they better be either a big who can protect the rim and spread the floor offensively, or a wing/point who can run offense and hot the threeball.

I don’t see how it makes sense to re-sign Smart after next season if he’s looking for $20m a year. I don’t know if Indiana would do it, but Malcolm Brogdon would be a great fit with the Jays. Smart and Romeo might not be enough to make that trade happen, but maybe throwing in the 16th pick in this year’s draft could.

Try to trade Kemba for Horford, assuming they can’t get anything else for him, and re-sign Fournier. Brogdon, Brown, Fournier, Tatum, and TL, with AL, PP, Nesmith, and whatever veteran wing they can get for TT could be formidable. Every rotation guy shooting 38%+ from three, with the potential of six 40%+ from three) and great switchability on defense (except for PP)
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
8,160
Whether Smart shoots 36% or 33% from 3P isn't an issue from a points from Smart perspective, but it could matter immensely from a spacing perspective. Obviously, you are hoping 3s go in - but just as importantly is making those shots at a high enough clip so that the other team feels like they can't clog the lanes to keep Tatum/Brown from scoring.
 

Bleedred

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 21, 2001
9,966
Boston, MA
If you cannot sign Marcus to a team friendly deal, then no thank you. He's not getting better as a shooter, and he may actually regress. Couple that with the expected defensive decline, and he will be a significantly less valuable player under his next contract than he was under this one. Moving him this offseason for value seems to be the right move. If you cannot get acceptable value, let him play it out and trade him at the deadline or thank him for his services at the end of next season and move along.