Is anyone else worried that the Lakers picked up a legitimate beast in Randle?

[LarBrd33]

I love how a few decent games in preseason means that he's a future all star. Where was this in Smart?

You should know by now there's a double standard here. If it's a C's player shining in preseason, it's meaningless and most likely due to inferior competition. On the other hand, if it's another team's player shining in preseason, it's mostly likely due to transcending talent. It's maddening.

Not as much of a double standard as you'd think.

Regardless of how Smart develops from here on out, it's widely acknowledged that he's an elite perimeter defender.  Worst-case scenario he'll end up a Bruce Bowen or Tony Allen type that sticks around the league for years as a defensive specialist.  Best-case scenario, he develops into a star, but that would require a major leap for him offensively.  Thus-far, he's been disappointing on that end.

Right now if you were to poll folks on the better prospect between Randle and Smart, Smart would absolutely win.  But that doesn't mean I'm not impressed by what I'm seeing out of Randle.  And as I've been saying for a couple weeks, it's a debate that will gain steam the more we see out of Julius.   I can't pretend like I'm not impressed by what he's doing right now.  He looks like he'll be a 20 and 10 player.  It's pre-season so take it with a grain of salt, but over his past 5 games he's averaging 14.2 points, 5.2 rebounds, 3 assists, 1 steal with 59% shooting in 22.6mpg.   THat's per-36 numbers of:  22.6 points, 8.2 rebounds, 4.7 assists and 1.6 steals.   That's not a double standard, it's just math.   If you watch him play, it's hard not to be impressed by his explosiveness with and without the ball.  It's hard not to notice his surprising ball-handling and passing.  It's hard not to notice his improvements on the defensive end.  He's got the "element of surprise" working in his favor right now and I still have questions about whether or not he can shoot (he just seems to be attacking the basket relentlessly). 

We acknowledge Smart is a legit prospect, but his struggles (offense) continue to be a struggle.  Over the second half of the season he shot 36%/32%/63% and his hit/miss performance in summerleague and pre-season don't do much to temper those fears.   Since a lot of folks (myself included) had Randle higher on the draft board... and Boston opted to take Smart due to Rondo and our PF log-jam, it's hard not to compare those two guys.   We'll be looking at Smart vs Randle for a while.   

Also I'll say that last year in pre-season, Smart seemed to be slightly better.  8.4 points, 2.6 rebounds, 4.6 assists, 2.4 steals in 26.4mpg.   Randle averaged 8.8 points, 5.8 rebounds, 1.1 assist in 20.9mpg.   If you evened out their minutes, Randle was slightly better statistically.   Obviously, we can't compare them during the regular season, because Randle played a total of 14 minutes.   But so far, Randle has been the more impressive during pre-season this year.   

Smart might win in the polls right now, but there's a real debate here we'll have to revisit at some point.

The thing is, you never take context into the picture. Of course Randle is going to be putting up better numbers right now, because a) he's on a much worse team with a larger role and b) he has much more freedom in the offense than Smart. It's a bad analogy, just as it was last year when everyone wanted to compare him to Noel. Now I'll openly admit that a defensive big is more valuable than a defensive guard, but comparing Smart to either of those players right now based solely on their performance without considering the context is illogical.

It's similar to trying to compare Love's numbers in Cleveland versus Minnesota and making the argument that Minnesota Love was better than Cleveland Love, i.e. it fails to take the context of team dynamics into consideration.

So I'm not saying that it won't ever be a debate; I'm saying to be consistent and fair. You can't categorically dismiss player performances due to them being in the preseason for one team, which you undeniably did for most of the C's players, and not the others. You also have to take context into consideration with this debate. You can be impressed with Randle all you want, and you're probably justified in this belief. I haven't watched him, so I can't really say. However, at least treat him with the same type of skeptical judgment that you treat our own players with. You know the saying...

Sounds more like you are making excuses for poor performance.  Having a deep team isn't why smart shot 30% in summer league.

Noel is a superior prospect.  Randle might be too.  We will have to see

lb, once again you completely evade a key, and oft repeated point about your posting. you were being called out on having a double standard, yet again. it is true, you do and it detracts from your posts.

please recognize this habit and be more even handed in your evaluation of celtics versus non-celtics.

doing so will improve your posting immensely. you are a very good poster, and this would make you an even better one.

It's a nonsense point. Simple as that.  60 guys get drafted every year.  If I'm rightfully intrigued by a handful and rightfully underwhelmed by the fab Melos, gabe pruitts, Luke harangody's and jr giddens of the world, homers will call it a double standard.  Look, if our late round players are underwhelming as prospects when compared to guys I've been hyped about like Michael kidd gilchrist, Anthony Davis and Andre Drummond, it's not because I'm blinded by anti-homer bias... It's because our prospects rarely are relevant. I get called out in threads for suggesting that Ben mclemore has a future while Phil Pressey is a worthless scrub.  Then a couple years later when pressey is gone and mclemore is showing his potential, nobody makes any mention of it. 

It's not a double standard. I'm not arbitrarily hyping up guys taken 28th for other teams.  I doubt most people here can even name the non-Celtic equivalents of the RJ hunters and Jordan mickeys of the world.

Again, we have had two prospects in the past 15 years develop into borderline all stars ... Rondo and big al.  I saw rondo for what he was. He was my favorite player on the team.  A flawed, but talented player.  Eventually people caught up with me on my comments about Rondo's flaws.  I absolutely adored Big Al.  I thought he had a chance to become a perennial all-star.  His low post game was amazing.  Next time we have a prospect like that, I'll be sure to sing songs of them. But no, I am not a bad fan for being underwhelmed by jerry hozier and dingus slingading.   35+ drafted players since Paul Pierce and a tiny percentage turned into worthwhile players.   I loved Pierce from the start.   There was a two month period where Delonte West looked like the next Steph Curry before Steph Curry was Steph Curry.  I liked Joe Johnson, but he was here all too brief.  Gerald Green showed flashes.   I liked a lot of what Tony Allen had to offer, but there was clear limitations.   I've continued to comment positively about Sullinger even while the majority of this forum has turned on him... he's got some game in spite of his problems.  I remain curious of Olynyk's potential impact with forced starter minutes... his shooting intrigues me.  I'm not ruling out Smart's potential.   Beyond that, what are we talking about?  Am I taking heat for not jumping on the Joseph Forte or Kedrick Brown train?  People mad that I called Anthony Davis the next KG during his rookie season?

Marcus Smart is a legit prospect and I acknowledge he has star potential.  He also might peak out as a defensive specialist... Which is what better basketball minds like Zach Lowe also acknowledge.  I think Noel is a superior prospect. Smart vs randle seems it will be a long term debate with how randle is looking.  Certainly seems that Ainge made the right choice so far.  Nobody knows how Smart or Randle will look 3-5 years from now.  It'll be interesting.  Here's hoping Smart turns into a star.   

[GC003332]

It is good for Randle that he is injury free, never good to see a young guy miss out on a season through injury, He should pace himself and try not to hit the ' rookie wall ' so to speak, once the Lakers are eliminated from playoff contention in mid March he will be able to put up some nice fantasy league numbers much like Clarkson did last year.
Him grabbing offensive rebounds off Kobe and Young's bricks will be a good for his game.

[86MaxwellSmart]

Weird thing is, I was just at Summer league in Vegas 3 months ago--and Randle looked awful...Only going right on his drives, missed easy shots, turnovers and fouls like crazy...BUT the games in Pre Season, he looks amazing---What the Heck happened in the last 3 months---?

[LarBrd33]

Weird thing is, I was just at Summer league in Vegas 3 months ago--and Randle looked awful...

That's not weird at all.   

He had a fractured right tibia that kept him out for an entire year.  He wasn't cleared for 5-on-5 drills until June 26th.  It wasn't even clear if he'd play in Summer league. 

[Forza Juventus]

I liked Randle at the time of the draft but I liked Smart more and I still do. I thought the draft was 7 players deep. This was my top 7 at the time:

1 Wiggins
2 Jabari
3 Embiid
4 Gordon
5 Smart
6 Exum
7 Randle

At the time I would have been happy with any of those 7. It's too early to judge that draft now but today I would put Smart probably 3rd out of those 7. But it's early. I like Randle and Smart, but Smart more, I think they will both be good players tho.

[LarBrd33]

I liked Randle at the time of the draft but I liked Smart more and I still do. I thought the draft was 7 players deep. This was my top 7 at the time:

1 Wiggins
2 Jabari
3 Embiid
4 Gordon
5 Smart
6 Exum
7 Randle

At the time I would have been happy with any of those 7. It's too early to judge that draft now but today I would put Smart probably 3rd out of those 7. But it's early. I like Randle and Smart, but Smart more, I think they will both be good players tho.

In the early going, Smart looks like a top 4 pick.   Hard to say Dante Exum, Aaron Gordon, Julius Randle, Joel Embiid, Noah Vonleh or even Jabari Parker have been better so far.   Shoot, based on their NBA resumes so far, Smart might even be #2.

But long-term?... who knows.   The only reason Randle vs Smart is interesting is because we passed on Randle in favor of Smart... and Randle ended up on the Lakers.  Nobody is going to lose sleep if Jabari Parker ends up a superstar.   But if Randle does?... I don't blame folks for being peeved.

Even so, if Ainge had those two relatively close on his board, you really can't fault him for taking Smart.  Sully and Oly both looked like possible starters.  Rondo was definitely a goner.  It would have been pretty nuts for him to take Randle over Smart if he had them neck-and-neck.  Rookie season proved Ainge right... so far.

[chambers]

I love how a few decent games in preseason means that he's a future all star. Where was this in Smart?

You should know by now there's a double standard here. If it's a C's player shining in preseason, it's meaningless and most likely due to inferior competition. On the other hand, if it's another team's player shining in preseason, it's mostly likely due to transcending talent. It's maddening.

Please quote/highlight when I've put down a C's player shining in preseason?
In fact I was one of the only people here defending the Rozier pick and I've also said I think he's going to be an awesome player relative to the position he was picked. I've said the same about RJ Hunter during summer league along with Rozier- as have most Celticsblog fans actually. Can you point out a trend that suggests anything other than 90% of Celticsblogs fans being incredibly thrilled with our picks this year and their play up to this point?
Can you point out a trend that suggesst 90% of Cetlicsblog isn't thrilled with Marcus Smart's progression and great preseason play? (only 2 games but he's looked really good).
Don't taint an entire thread with some generalization BS- just give credit where it's due.
If you hate LarBrd33 please put down the sniper rifle and keep the chest beating for another thread.

Settle down there, champ. When the name "Chambers" comes out of my mouth regarding something you said, then you can put me on blast.

We all know who I was talking to, because it's an obvious tactic that is used over and over again. I have no problem with LarBrd33, and I don't think he has any problem with me. We just happen to disagree about a lot of things. How am i picking up the "sniper rifle" and "chest beating" by pointing out some obvious flawed reasoning? There is an obvious double standard there that is empirically verifiable, i.e. his tirade that we shouldn't look too much into Celtics' preseason numbers then arguing that Randle has looked excellent in preseason without even mentioning the disclaimer of it being preseason. It's fine if he skews towards skepticism; we just ask that he applies it fairly to other teams as well.

Take a chill pill, brah...

Rondo9

I love how a few decent games in preseason means that he's a future all star. Where was this in Smart?

jpotter33

You should know by now there's a double standard here. If it's a C's player shining in preseason, it's meaningless and most likely due to inferior competition. On the other hand, if it's another team's player shining in preseason, it's mostly likely due to transcending talent. It's maddening.

So what part of the thread warranted those generalization responses lol?
It's a freakin thread about Julius Randle playing really well.
Nothing about him being better than Smart.
Some people say they're happy we took Smart which is fine because I am too. I just think it will suck for us if the Lakers picked up a binkie because that's what he looks like so far and I would have preferred if they'd taken someone like Stauskas.

[Forza Juventus]

I liked Randle at the time of the draft but I liked Smart more and I still do. I thought the draft was 7 players deep. This was my top 7 at the time:

1 Wiggins
2 Jabari
3 Embiid
4 Gordon
5 Smart
6 Exum
7 Randle

At the time I would have been happy with any of those 7. It's too early to judge that draft now but today I would put Smart probably 3rd out of those 7. But it's early. I like Randle and Smart, but Smart more, I think they will both be good players tho.

In the early going, Smart looks like a top 4 pick.   Hard to say Dante Exum, Aaron Gordon, Julius Randle, Joel Embiid, Noah Vonleh or even Jabari Parker have been better so far.   Shoot, based on their NBA resumes so far, Smart might even be #2.

But long-term?... who knows.   The only reason Randle vs Smart is interesting is because we passed on Randle in favor of Smart... and Randle ended up on the Lakers.  Nobody is going to lose sleep if Jabari Parker ends up a superstar.   But if Randle does?... I don't blame folks for being peeved.

Even so, if Ainge had those two relatively close on his board, you really can't fault him for taking Smart.  Sully and Oly both looked like possible starters.  Rondo was definitely a goner.  It would have been pretty nuts for him to take Randle over Smart if he had them neck-and-neck.  Rookie season proved Ainge right... so far.

I agree with all of this. And for people to say it's not even a debate whether Randle will pass Smart is silly. In my opinion Smart will have a better career but we will see. I wish Randle wasn't picked by LA Lakers of all teams cuz I like him and hate them 

[jpotter33]

I love how a few decent games in preseason means that he's a future all star. Where was this in Smart?

You should know by now there's a double standard here. If it's a C's player shining in preseason, it's meaningless and most likely due to inferior competition. On the other hand, if it's another team's player shining in preseason, it's mostly likely due to transcending talent. It's maddening.

Not as much of a double standard as you'd think.

Regardless of how Smart develops from here on out, it's widely acknowledged that he's an elite perimeter defender.  Worst-case scenario he'll end up a Bruce Bowen or Tony Allen type that sticks around the league for years as a defensive specialist.  Best-case scenario, he develops into a star, but that would require a major leap for him offensively.  Thus-far, he's been disappointing on that end.

Right now if you were to poll folks on the better prospect between Randle and Smart, Smart would absolutely win.  But that doesn't mean I'm not impressed by what I'm seeing out of Randle.  And as I've been saying for a couple weeks, it's a debate that will gain steam the more we see out of Julius.   I can't pretend like I'm not impressed by what he's doing right now.  He looks like he'll be a 20 and 10 player.  It's pre-season so take it with a grain of salt, but over his past 5 games he's averaging 14.2 points, 5.2 rebounds, 3 assists, 1 steal with 59% shooting in 22.6mpg.   THat's per-36 numbers of:  22.6 points, 8.2 rebounds, 4.7 assists and 1.6 steals.   That's not a double standard, it's just math.   If you watch him play, it's hard not to be impressed by his explosiveness with and without the ball.  It's hard not to notice his surprising ball-handling and passing.  It's hard not to notice his improvements on the defensive end.  He's got the "element of surprise" working in his favor right now and I still have questions about whether or not he can shoot (he just seems to be attacking the basket relentlessly). 

We acknowledge Smart is a legit prospect, but his struggles (offense) continue to be a struggle.  Over the second half of the season he shot 36%/32%/63% and his hit/miss performance in summerleague and pre-season don't do much to temper those fears.   Since a lot of folks (myself included) had Randle higher on the draft board... and Boston opted to take Smart due to Rondo and our PF log-jam, it's hard not to compare those two guys.   We'll be looking at Smart vs Randle for a while.   

Also I'll say that last year in pre-season, Smart seemed to be slightly better.  8.4 points, 2.6 rebounds, 4.6 assists, 2.4 steals in 26.4mpg.   Randle averaged 8.8 points, 5.8 rebounds, 1.1 assist in 20.9mpg.   If you evened out their minutes, Randle was slightly better statistically.   Obviously, we can't compare them during the regular season, because Randle played a total of 14 minutes.   But so far, Randle has been the more impressive during pre-season this year.   

Smart might win in the polls right now, but there's a real debate here we'll have to revisit at some point.

The thing is, you never take context into the picture. Of course Randle is going to be putting up better numbers right now, because a) he's on a much worse team with a larger role and b) he has much more freedom in the offense than Smart. It's a bad analogy, just as it was last year when everyone wanted to compare him to Noel. Now I'll openly admit that a defensive big is more valuable than a defensive guard, but comparing Smart to either of those players right now based solely on their performance without considering the context is illogical.

It's similar to trying to compare Love's numbers in Cleveland versus Minnesota and making the argument that Minnesota Love was better than Cleveland Love, i.e. it fails to take the context of team dynamics into consideration.

So I'm not saying that it won't ever be a debate; I'm saying to be consistent and fair. You can't categorically dismiss player performances due to them being in the preseason for one team, which you undeniably did for most of the C's players, and not the others. You also have to take context into consideration with this debate. You can be impressed with Randle all you want, and you're probably justified in this belief. I haven't watched him, so I can't really say. However, at least treat him with the same type of skeptical judgment that you treat our own players with. You know the saying...

Sounds more like you are making excuses for poor performance.  Having a deep team isn't why smart shot 30% in summer league.

Noel is a superior prospect.  Randle might be too.  We will have to see

lb, once again you completely evade a key, and oft repeated point about your posting. you were being called out on having a double standard, yet again. it is true, you do and it detracts from your posts.

please recognize this habit and be more even handed in your evaluation of celtics versus non-celtics.

doing so will improve your posting immensely. you are a very good poster, and this would make you an even better one.

It's a nonsense point. Simple as that.  60 guys get drafted every year.  If I'm rightfully intrigued by a handful and rightfully underwhelmed by the fab Melos, gabe pruitts, Luke harangody's and jr giddens of the world, homers will call it a double standard.  Look, if our late round players are underwhelming as prospects when compared to guys I've been hyped about like Michael kidd gilchrist, Anthony Davis and Andre Drummond, it's not because I'm blinded by anti-homer bias... It's because our prospects rarely are relevant. I get called out in threads for suggesting that Ben mclemore has a future while Phil Pressey is a worthless scrub.  Then a couple years later when pressey is gone and mclemore is showing his potential, nobody makes any mention of it. 

It's not a double standard. I'm not arbitrarily hyping up guys taken 28th for other teams.  I doubt most people here can even name the non-Celtic equivalents of the RJ hunters and Jordan mickeys of the world.

Again, we have had two prospects in the past 15 years develop into borderline all stars ... Rondo and big al.  I saw rondo for what he was. He was my favorite player on the team.  A flawed, but talented player.  Eventually people caught up with me on my comments about Rondo's flaws.  I absolutely adored Big Al.  I thought he had a chance to become a perennial all-star.  His low post game was amazing.  Next time we have a prospect like that, I'll be sure to sing songs of them. But no, I am not a bad fan for being underwhelmed by jerry hozier and dingus slingading.   35+ drafted players since Paul Pierce and a tiny percentage turned into worthwhile players.   I loved Pierce from the start.   There was a two month period where Delonte West looked like the next Steph Curry before Steph Curry was Steph Curry.  I liked Joe Johnson, but he was here all too brief.  Gerald Green showed flashes.   I liked a lot of what Tony Allen had to offer, but there was clear limitations.   I've continued to comment positively about Sullinger even while the majority of this forum has turned on him... he's got some game in spite of his problems.  I remain curious of Olynyk's potential impact with forced starter minutes... his shooting intrigues me.  I'm not ruling out Smart's potential.   Beyond that, what are we talking about?  Am I taking heat for not jumping on the Joseph Forte or Kedrick Brown train?  People mad that I called Anthony Davis the next KG during his rookie season?

Marcus Smart is a legit prospect and I acknowledge he has star potential.  He also might peak out as a defensive specialist... Which is what better basketball minds like Zach Lowe also acknowledge.  I think Noel is a superior prospect. Smart vs randle seems it will be a long term debate with how randle is looking.  Certainly seems that Ainge made the right choice so far.  Nobody knows how Smart or Randle will look 3-5 years from now.  It'll be interesting.  Here's hoping Smart turns into a star.

Man, nobody is saying anything about you not liking lesser prospects compared to the more hyped prospects.

What we're saying is you consistently have a pessimistic, negative outlook on our players while simultaneously having a more positive outlook on other teams' players. We'd be totally fine if you were skeptical and pessimistic all around, but this is a consistent, concerted effort by you to treat players on other teams different than our own players.

The Smart versus Randle debate is a perfect depiction of this. Though you made it perfectly clear to everyone to temper their expectations with Smart because it was preseason, you made no such mention of that when talking about Randle, because you've liked him all along more than Smart. This is confirmation bias 101. Tell me, how is this not extremely inconsistent and illogical?

[jpotter33]

I love how a few decent games in preseason means that he's a future all star. Where was this in Smart?

You should know by now there's a double standard here. If it's a C's player shining in preseason, it's meaningless and most likely due to inferior competition. On the other hand, if it's another team's player shining in preseason, it's mostly likely due to transcending talent. It's maddening.

Please quote/highlight when I've put down a C's player shining in preseason?
In fact I was one of the only people here defending the Rozier pick and I've also said I think he's going to be an awesome player relative to the position he was picked. I've said the same about RJ Hunter during summer league along with Rozier- as have most Celticsblog fans actually. Can you point out a trend that suggests anything other than 90% of Celticsblogs fans being incredibly thrilled with our picks this year and their play up to this point?
Can you point out a trend that suggesst 90% of Cetlicsblog isn't thrilled with Marcus Smart's progression and great preseason play? (only 2 games but he's looked really good).
Don't taint an entire thread with some generalization BS- just give credit where it's due.
If you hate LarBrd33 please put down the sniper rifle and keep the chest beating for another thread.

Settle down there, champ. When the name "Chambers" comes out of my mouth regarding something you said, then you can put me on blast.

We all know who I was talking to, because it's an obvious tactic that is used over and over again. I have no problem with LarBrd33, and I don't think he has any problem with me. We just happen to disagree about a lot of things. How am i picking up the "sniper rifle" and "chest beating" by pointing out some obvious flawed reasoning? There is an obvious double standard there that is empirically verifiable, i.e. his tirade that we shouldn't look too much into Celtics' preseason numbers then arguing that Randle has looked excellent in preseason without even mentioning the disclaimer of it being preseason. It's fine if he skews towards skepticism; we just ask that he applies it fairly to other teams as well.

Take a chill pill, brah...

Rondo9

I love how a few decent games in preseason means that he's a future all star. Where was this in Smart?

jpotter33

You should know by now there's a double standard here. If it's a C's player shining in preseason, it's meaningless and most likely due to inferior competition. On the other hand, if it's another team's player shining in preseason, it's mostly likely due to transcending talent. It's maddening.

So what part of the thread warranted those generalization responses lol?
It's a freakin thread about Julius Randle playing really well.
Nothing about him being better than Smart.
Some people say they're happy we took Smart which is fine because I am too. I just think it will suck for us if the Lakers picked up a binkie because that's what he looks like so far and I would have preferred if they'd taken someone like Stauskas.

Because, like I said, this wasn't aimed at you or your original post. In response to your original post, LarBrd33 said "Yup.  I was saying the Smart vs Randle debate wasn't over yet and people acted like I was trolling.  Watch the kid... He's legit."

Though I can't necessarily speak for sure for others, I think we were mostly talking about the fact that LarBrd33 isn't making any type of concession for it being preseason for Randle, but when Smart was tearing it up he made sure to try and temper everyone's expectations due to it being preseason. That's what we're talking about with the inconsistency between people's perception of Randle and Smart, not your original post.

[LarBrd33]

I love how a few decent games in preseason means that he's a future all star. Where was this in Smart?

You should know by now there's a double standard here. If it's a C's player shining in preseason, it's meaningless and most likely due to inferior competition. On the other hand, if it's another team's player shining in preseason, it's mostly likely due to transcending talent. It's maddening.

Not as much of a double standard as you'd think.

Regardless of how Smart develops from here on out, it's widely acknowledged that he's an elite perimeter defender.  Worst-case scenario he'll end up a Bruce Bowen or Tony Allen type that sticks around the league for years as a defensive specialist.  Best-case scenario, he develops into a star, but that would require a major leap for him offensively.  Thus-far, he's been disappointing on that end.

Right now if you were to poll folks on the better prospect between Randle and Smart, Smart would absolutely win.  But that doesn't mean I'm not impressed by what I'm seeing out of Randle.  And as I've been saying for a couple weeks, it's a debate that will gain steam the more we see out of Julius.   I can't pretend like I'm not impressed by what he's doing right now.  He looks like he'll be a 20 and 10 player.  It's pre-season so take it with a grain of salt, but over his past 5 games he's averaging 14.2 points, 5.2 rebounds, 3 assists, 1 steal with 59% shooting in 22.6mpg.   THat's per-36 numbers of:  22.6 points, 8.2 rebounds, 4.7 assists and 1.6 steals.   That's not a double standard, it's just math.   If you watch him play, it's hard not to be impressed by his explosiveness with and without the ball.  It's hard not to notice his surprising ball-handling and passing.  It's hard not to notice his improvements on the defensive end.  He's got the "element of surprise" working in his favor right now and I still have questions about whether or not he can shoot (he just seems to be attacking the basket relentlessly). 

We acknowledge Smart is a legit prospect, but his struggles (offense) continue to be a struggle.  Over the second half of the season he shot 36%/32%/63% and his hit/miss performance in summerleague and pre-season don't do much to temper those fears.   Since a lot of folks (myself included) had Randle higher on the draft board... and Boston opted to take Smart due to Rondo and our PF log-jam, it's hard not to compare those two guys.   We'll be looking at Smart vs Randle for a while.   

Also I'll say that last year in pre-season, Smart seemed to be slightly better.  8.4 points, 2.6 rebounds, 4.6 assists, 2.4 steals in 26.4mpg.   Randle averaged 8.8 points, 5.8 rebounds, 1.1 assist in 20.9mpg.   If you evened out their minutes, Randle was slightly better statistically.   Obviously, we can't compare them during the regular season, because Randle played a total of 14 minutes.   But so far, Randle has been the more impressive during pre-season this year.   

Smart might win in the polls right now, but there's a real debate here we'll have to revisit at some point.

The thing is, you never take context into the picture. Of course Randle is going to be putting up better numbers right now, because a) he's on a much worse team with a larger role and b) he has much more freedom in the offense than Smart. It's a bad analogy, just as it was last year when everyone wanted to compare him to Noel. Now I'll openly admit that a defensive big is more valuable than a defensive guard, but comparing Smart to either of those players right now based solely on their performance without considering the context is illogical.

It's similar to trying to compare Love's numbers in Cleveland versus Minnesota and making the argument that Minnesota Love was better than Cleveland Love, i.e. it fails to take the context of team dynamics into consideration.

So I'm not saying that it won't ever be a debate; I'm saying to be consistent and fair. You can't categorically dismiss player performances due to them being in the preseason for one team, which you undeniably did for most of the C's players, and not the others. You also have to take context into consideration with this debate. You can be impressed with Randle all you want, and you're probably justified in this belief. I haven't watched him, so I can't really say. However, at least treat him with the same type of skeptical judgment that you treat our own players with. You know the saying...

Sounds more like you are making excuses for poor performance.  Having a deep team isn't why smart shot 30% in summer league.

Noel is a superior prospect.  Randle might be too.  We will have to see

lb, once again you completely evade a key, and oft repeated point about your posting. you were being called out on having a double standard, yet again. it is true, you do and it detracts from your posts.

please recognize this habit and be more even handed in your evaluation of celtics versus non-celtics.

doing so will improve your posting immensely. you are a very good poster, and this would make you an even better one.

It's a nonsense point. Simple as that.  60 guys get drafted every year.  If I'm rightfully intrigued by a handful and rightfully underwhelmed by the fab Melos, gabe pruitts, Luke harangody's and jr giddens of the world, homers will call it a double standard.  Look, if our late round players are underwhelming as prospects when compared to guys I've been hyped about like Michael kidd gilchrist, Anthony Davis and Andre Drummond, it's not because I'm blinded by anti-homer bias... It's because our prospects rarely are relevant. I get called out in threads for suggesting that Ben mclemore has a future while Phil Pressey is a worthless scrub.  Then a couple years later when pressey is gone and mclemore is showing his potential, nobody makes any mention of it. 

It's not a double standard. I'm not arbitrarily hyping up guys taken 28th for other teams.  I doubt most people here can even name the non-Celtic equivalents of the RJ hunters and Jordan mickeys of the world.

Again, we have had two prospects in the past 15 years develop into borderline all stars ... Rondo and big al.  I saw rondo for what he was. He was my favorite player on the team.  A flawed, but talented player.  Eventually people caught up with me on my comments about Rondo's flaws.  I absolutely adored Big Al.  I thought he had a chance to become a perennial all-star.  His low post game was amazing.  Next time we have a prospect like that, I'll be sure to sing songs of them. But no, I am not a bad fan for being underwhelmed by jerry hozier and dingus slingading.   35+ drafted players since Paul Pierce and a tiny percentage turned into worthwhile players.   I loved Pierce from the start.   There was a two month period where Delonte West looked like the next Steph Curry before Steph Curry was Steph Curry.  I liked Joe Johnson, but he was here all too brief.  Gerald Green showed flashes.   I liked a lot of what Tony Allen had to offer, but there was clear limitations.   I've continued to comment positively about Sullinger even while the majority of this forum has turned on him... he's got some game in spite of his problems.  I remain curious of Olynyk's potential impact with forced starter minutes... his shooting intrigues me.  I'm not ruling out Smart's potential.   Beyond that, what are we talking about?  Am I taking heat for not jumping on the Joseph Forte or Kedrick Brown train?  People mad that I called Anthony Davis the next KG during his rookie season?

Marcus Smart is a legit prospect and I acknowledge he has star potential.  He also might peak out as a defensive specialist... Which is what better basketball minds like Zach Lowe also acknowledge.  I think Noel is a superior prospect. Smart vs randle seems it will be a long term debate with how randle is looking.  Certainly seems that Ainge made the right choice so far.  Nobody knows how Smart or Randle will look 3-5 years from now.  It'll be interesting.  Here's hoping Smart turns into a star.

Man, nobody is saying anything about you not liking lesser prospects compared to the more hyped prospects.

What we're saying is you consistently have a pessimistic, negative outlook on our players while simultaneously having a more positive outlook on other teams' players. We'd be totally fine if you were skeptical and pessimistic all around, but this is a consistent, concerted effort by you to treat players on other teams different than our own players.

The Smart versus Randle debate is a perfect depiction of this. Though you made it perfectly clear to everyone to temper their expectations with Smart because it was preseason, you made no such mention of that when talking about Randle, because you've liked him all along more than Smart. This is confirmation bias 101. Tell me, how is this not extremely inconsistent and illogical?

Potter, I like David Lee.  I've been on board with the David Lee era since Ainge brought him in.  He's probably our best player.  He's on his last legs, but still probably capable of playing at a fringe star level.  There... I said something positive.  Hope that helps.

I'm not declaring Randle a future superstar.  My guess is neither Smart or Randle end up superstars.   Randle seems like he can develop into a David Lee level talent, though... borderline 20 and 10 with rough defense.  It seems reasonable.  A lot of folks have him pegged as the next Zach Randolph.    Smart's peak is less clear.   I'll admit I'm slightly bias against undersized shooting guards who can't shoot... but I can't dismiss Smart's great perimeter defense.  Hopefully he develops into more.  I'm not counting on it, but I'm not dismissing the possibility.

Also, my opinions on the team's talent aren't shared by many here, but jump outside the green cloud and you'll find most side with my perspective.   Great basketball minds dismiss the talent on this team.  It's seen as a hodgepodge group of mediocrity that is only successful due to our wonderboy coach.   There's been countless articles written about our talent level.  A collection of role players.  A team entirely made up of 6th men.   If I'm underwhelmed by the talent on the team, it's not necessarily me being a brat... it's because generally the talent on this team is universally seen as being underwhelming.   Amir Johnson is ok.   Avery Bradley is ok.   David Lee has some game left.   Marcus Smart is a borderline starter with borderline star potential.   IT is a nice gimmicky player who can provide an offensive spark, but probably never a solution as a long-term starter.   Evan Turner is ok.   Crowder is ok.  Oly and Sully are ok.   I think pretty much everyone on this team is "ok".   Most of them could get bench minutes around the league.    Last year, the common descriptor of this team was that there wasn't a single player on the roster that would start for one of the contenders.  Was that overly negative?  Perhaps.  Maybe one of two of our guys could sneak into a starting lineup on a good team.   David Lee's our best player and he averaged 9 minutes on the champion (with 9 playoff DNP's)...  If I'm not super enthusiastic about the talent on this team... it's partially because there's not a lot to be super enthusiastic about in regards to the talent on this team.   I think Brad can probably get them 45 wins in spite of this.

[crimson_stallion]

Regardless of how Smart develops from here on out, it's widely acknowledged that he's an elite perimeter defender.  Worst-case scenario he'll end up a Bruce Bowen or Tony Allen type that sticks around the league for years as a defensive specialist.

The problem with an analysis like this is that Marcus Smart is that other than physical size and defensive credentials, Marcus Smart is NOTHING like Tony Allen.

Tony Allen is (and always has been) an awful offensive player.  He was never capable of dribbling a basketball, he could never pass to save his life, and he's never been even the slightest bit threatening outside of about 5 feet as a scorer. 

Even as a rookie, Smart already showed flashes of his potential as a solid passer, ball handler and shooter. 

That's the difference between:
a) A good starter who specialises at defense
b) A good role player who specialises at defense

Unlike many specialist players (like Allen) Smart already has the foundations there to be an 'all round' player.  All he really has to do is to make modest (but consistent) improvements to his shooting, passing and ball handling each year, and that will be enough to ensure he eventually develops into a good starter.

I really think Andre Iguodala (despite playing a different position) is a good comparison.  With the exception of his defense he doesn't do anything at an 'elite' level - he does however do everything 'well', and that's been good enough to make him a borderline All-Star for most of his career.

I can see Smart developing into a similar type of player.

[LarBrd33]

Regardless of how Smart develops from here on out, it's widely acknowledged that he's an elite perimeter defender.  Worst-case scenario he'll end up a Bruce Bowen or Tony Allen type that sticks around the league for years as a defensive specialist.

The problem with an analysis like this is that Marcus Smart is that other than physical size and defensive credentials, Marcus Smart is NOTHING like Tony Allen.

Tony Allen is (and always has been) an awful offensive player.  He was never capable of dribbling a basketball, he could never pass to save his life, and he's never been even the slightest bit threatening outside of about 5 feet as a scorer. 

Even as a rookie, Smart already showed flashes of his potential as a solid passer, ball handler and shooter. 

That's the difference between:
a) A good starter who specialises at defense
b) A good role player who specialises at defense

Unlike many specialist players (like Allen) Smart already has the foundations there to be an 'all round' player.  All he really has to do is to make modest (but consistent) improvements to his shooting, passing and ball handling each year, and that will be enough to ensure he eventually develops into a good starter.

I really think Andre Iguodala (despite playing a different position) is a good comparison.  With the exception of his defense he doesn't do anything at an 'elite' level - he does however do everything 'well', and that's been good enough to make him a borderline All-Star for most of his career.

I can see Smart developing into a similar type of player.

The Allen comparison bums out people here, but I'm not the first to have made it.   I think it was Bill Simmons and Zach Lowe.   Allen was never a shooter, but he showed some ability to attack and finish at the rim early in his career.   I really have to hope Smart ends up better than Tony Allen in Allen's prime.   People have pointed out Smart's mediocre three point shooting as a sign of him being a superior offensive player.   Allen was a terrible three point shooter.  In 2007, Allen's per-36 numbers were 17 points, 5.5 rebounds, 2.5 assists, 2.2 steals with 51%/24%/78% shooting.   He could score a little.

I think it's more likely that Smart ends up a Rodney Stuckey type.

Who would you rather have... Zach Randolph in his prime or Rodney Stuckey in his prime?  I don't think either Randle or Smart will be perfect.  It will be interesting seeing them develop, though.

[Lucky17]

Randle has broken his right foot (in high school) and broken his right leg (rookie year).

Staying free of major injury will be the biggest factor in whether Randle will be able to reach his potential.

[PhoSita]

Randle has broken his right foot (in high school) and broken his right leg (rookie year).

Staying free of major injury will be the biggest factor in whether Randle will be able to reach his potential.

Indeed.

Add to that the fact that he profiles as exactly the sort of player who is going out of style -- the undersized power forward with limited range and a penchant for playing back to the basket -- and you can see why the Celts went with Smart.

Smart is a guard tailor made for the new NBA.  Restricts his shot selection to three pointers and attempts inside, potential as a pick and roll ball handler, can cover positions 1-3, forces turnovers, can rebound well, works well on the ball as well as off the ball.