Author Topic: Jackie Mac on Smart free agency: "he's going for the money"  (Read 3906 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Jackie Mac on Smart free agency: "he's going for the money"
« Reply #60 on: May 23, 2018, 02:16:05 PM »

Offline KGs Knee

  • Danny Ainge
  • **********
  • Posts: 10609
  • Tommy Points: 1191
I'm just not worried about this. I don't believe Smart is going to get a big offer from anyone, maybe $12m tops, probably a good bit less. Boston should be able to match any offer I expect him to get.

Teams just don't pay huge sums of money to offensively limited roles players who are guards, no matter how good they are on defense.

Re: Jackie Mac on Smart free agency: "he's going for the money"
« Reply #61 on: May 23, 2018, 02:17:31 PM »

Offline celticsclay

  • Satch Sanders
  • *********
  • Posts: 9416
  • Tommy Points: 1025
I can see all of the Pacers/Atlanta/Nets/Kings having interest in Smart.

Because he's a RFA though I don't see any of them except the Kings willing to offer him enough that the C's wouldn't match. No one wants to overpay the 6th man type who cannot space the floor, except maybe the Kings because they are dumb.

I think he either figures out a compromise with the C's or takes the QO.
The Suns weren't on that list (because of cap holds), but they have room (if they let Payton go) and a real need at the position (assuming they draft Ayton #1).

I hadn't even thought of that. If I am a Suns fan, I love that core going forward. Booker/Ayton are your foundational pieces, with a supporting cast of Jackson (who knows about that shot, but there is hope,) Smart, and Warren. Add in whether Bender or Chriss proves they are the long term 4, and you have a nice core.

Smart as a plus passer, is a perfect compliment to Booker. He can become the effort leader of that squad, and just feed Booker and Ayton the rock.
Yeah.  I actually think they'd be one of the few landing spots for Rozier pre-draft as well, as they have 16 also.  Rozier for 16 straight up.  Boston can then hopefully get someone like Robert Williams to take a flyer on and then just brings back Smart to back-up Irving.

Feels like Rozier for 16 is really poor value in a trade.. this is the 16 picks since 2000. Rozier is probably at worst the 3rd best play on that list and many of them didn't ever have notable contributions.. surely they have to get more than that..

2017 Justin Patton, Creighton – Chicago Bulls
2016 Guerschon Yabusele, France – Boston Celtics
2015 Terry Rozier, Louisville – Boston Celtics
2014 Jusuf Nurkic, Bosnia – Denver Nuggets
2013 Lucas Nogueira, Brazil – Boston Celtics
2012 Royce White, Iowa St. – Houston Rockets
2011 Nikola Vucevic, USC – Philadelphia 76ers
2010 Luke Babbitt, Nevada – Minnesota Timberwolves

2000’s

2009 James Johnson, Wake Forest – Chicago Bulls
2008 Marreese Speights, Florida – Philadelphia 76ers
2007 Nick Young, Southern California – Washington Wizards
2006 Rodney Carney, Memphis – Chicago Bulls
2005 Joey Graham, Oklahoma State – Toronto Raptors
2004 Kirk Snyder, Nevada – Utah Jazz
2003 Troy Bell, Boston College – Boston Celtics
2002 Jiri Welsch, Czech Republic – Philadelphia 76ers
2001 Kirk Haston, Indiana – Charlotte Hornets
2000 Hidayet Turkoglu, Turkey – Sacramento Kings
Maybe, but he only has 1 year left on his rookie contract and is pretty old for most 3 year vets.  I also think, this board has vastly over hyped Rozier (I got carried away on that as well) based on a very strong couple of week period that clearly wasn't sustainable.   

If Boston has decided it is only keeping Smart or Rozier, and Smart is the guy they want, then I don't see why they wouldn't move on from Rozier this summer when his trade value will be at its highest.  Maybe 16 by itself isn't enough, but I honestly can't see Rozier landing a top 10 pick like many seem to think is possible and I'd rather have something then see Rozier walk for nothing the following summer.  Especially if that something is a high level big man talent like Robert Williams (he has a high bust potential as well).

I just think there is a team out there that views him as a young starting point guard. Even in his 'bad' series here against the Cavs he is averaging 14 and 6 and 5. Against Philly he averaged 17-7-4.5 and against milwaukee 17-4-7 (and these are all for a team advancing to the conference finals and being competitive in them.

Re: Jackie Mac on Smart free agency: "he's going for the money"
« Reply #62 on: May 23, 2018, 02:28:31 PM »

Offline JHTruth

  • NCE
  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2254
  • Tommy Points: 108
Most obvious statement of all time. The way he's playing lately he might have trouble getting the required offer..

Re: Jackie Mac on Smart free agency: "he's going for the money"
« Reply #63 on: May 23, 2018, 02:29:56 PM »

Offline Erik

  • Kyrie Irving
  • Posts: 756
  • Tommy Points: 133
  • The voice of reason
Teams just don't pay huge sums of money to offensively limited roles players who are guards, no matter how good they are on defense.

You're talking about people like Andre Roberson who have no functionality in a half court set because they actually cannot shoot the ball. His FT % is something like 40%.

Smart isn't offensively limited. He just can't shoot 3 pointers at a high %. He can still run an offense, drive to the basket, pass the ball, get fouls and make his FTs, post up, etc.  He's still a heck of an old school beat em' up point guard. He has exactly ONE hole in his game. It's just a shame that he lives in the 3 ball era otherwise he'd be such a great player.

Re: Jackie Mac on Smart free agency: "he's going for the money"
« Reply #64 on: May 23, 2018, 02:32:34 PM »

Offline CFAN38

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3719
  • Tommy Points: 304
I can see all of the Pacers/Atlanta/Nets/Kings having interest in Smart.

Because he's a RFA though I don't see any of them except the Kings willing to offer him enough that the C's wouldn't match. No one wants to overpay the 6th man type who cannot space the floor, except maybe the Kings because they are dumb.

I think he either figures out a compromise with the C's or takes the QO.
The Suns weren't on that list (because of cap holds), but they have room (if they let Payton go) and a real need at the position (assuming they draft Ayton #1).

I hadn't even thought of that. If I am a Suns fan, I love that core going forward. Booker/Ayton are your foundational pieces, with a supporting cast of Jackson (who knows about that shot, but there is hope,) Smart, and Warren. Add in whether Bender or Chriss proves they are the long term 4, and you have a nice core.

Smart as a plus passer, is a perfect compliment to Booker. He can become the effort leader of that squad, and just feed Booker and Ayton the rock.
Yeah.  I actually think they'd be one of the few landing spots for Rozier pre-draft as well, as they have 16 also.  Rozier for 16 straight up.  Boston can then hopefully get someone like Robert Williams to take a flyer on and then just brings back Smart to back-up Irving.

Feels like Rozier for 16 is really poor value in a trade.. this is the 16 picks since 2000. Rozier is probably at worst the 3rd best play on that list and many of them didn't ever have notable contributions.. surely they have to get more than that..

2017 Justin Patton, Creighton – Chicago Bulls
2016 Guerschon Yabusele, France – Boston Celtics
2015 Terry Rozier, Louisville – Boston Celtics
2014 Jusuf Nurkic, Bosnia – Denver Nuggets
2013 Lucas Nogueira, Brazil – Boston Celtics
2012 Royce White, Iowa St. – Houston Rockets
2011 Nikola Vucevic, USC – Philadelphia 76ers
2010 Luke Babbitt, Nevada – Minnesota Timberwolves

2000’s

2009 James Johnson, Wake Forest – Chicago Bulls
2008 Marreese Speights, Florida – Philadelphia 76ers
2007 Nick Young, Southern California – Washington Wizards
2006 Rodney Carney, Memphis – Chicago Bulls
2005 Joey Graham, Oklahoma State – Toronto Raptors
2004 Kirk Snyder, Nevada – Utah Jazz
2003 Troy Bell, Boston College – Boston Celtics
2002 Jiri Welsch, Czech Republic – Philadelphia 76ers
2001 Kirk Haston, Indiana – Charlotte Hornets
2000 Hidayet Turkoglu, Turkey – Sacramento Kings

I would expect the Cs to receive more in a Rozier for #16 trade. I would think something like Rozier for #16, #59, Ulis, and a future 2nd and only if a play of interest is available at #16.


Re: Jackie Mac on Smart free agency: "he's going for the money"
« Reply #65 on: May 23, 2018, 03:02:43 PM »

Online nickagneta

  • Global Moderator
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33122
  • Tommy Points: 5415
Teams just don't pay huge sums of money to offensively limited roles players who are guards, no matter how good they are on defense.

You're talking about people like Andre Roberson who have no functionality in a half court set because they actually cannot shoot the ball. His FT % is something like 40%.

Smart isn't offensively limited. He just can't shoot 3 pointers at a high %. He can still run an offense, drive to the basket, pass the ball, get fouls and make his FTs, post up, etc.  He's still a heck of an old school beat em' up point guard. He has exactly ONE hole in his game. It's just a shame that he lives in the 3 ball era otherwise he'd be such a great player.
Smart shot a total of 36% from the field. Amongst players that played at least 1500 minutes, that was 3rd worst in the league. Smart shot a TS% of 47.9% good for 6th worst in the league for players with at least 1500 minutes. His Offensive Win Shares of -0.6 is the 9th worst in the league for players playing at least 1500 minutes. His Offensive Box Plus Minus was 20th worst in the league for players with 1500 minutes played. His Turnover% was 8th worst for the same criteria.

Pretty clear the stats say Smart is a horrid shooter overall, not just from 3, that turns the ball over a bunch and overall is one of the worst offensive players in the league. His shot selection is bad. He forces too many drives which ends up in turnovers, missed shots or blocked shots. He barely involves all 5 offensive players choosing to play a 3 player offense with two players hanging in the corners and over dribbles.

That to me defines offensively limited.

Re: Jackie Mac on Smart free agency: "he's going for the money"
« Reply #66 on: May 23, 2018, 03:11:07 PM »

Offline jambr380

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7849
  • Tommy Points: 884
Teams just don't pay huge sums of money to offensively limited roles players who are guards, no matter how good they are on defense.

You're talking about people like Andre Roberson who have no functionality in a half court set because they actually cannot shoot the ball. His FT % is something like 40%.

Smart isn't offensively limited. He just can't shoot 3 pointers at a high %. He can still run an offense, drive to the basket, pass the ball, get fouls and make his FTs, post up, etc.  He's still a heck of an old school beat em' up point guard. He has exactly ONE hole in his game. It's just a shame that he lives in the 3 ball era otherwise he'd be such a great player.
Smart shot a total of 36% from the field. Amongst players that played at least 1500 minutes, that was 3rd worst in the league. Smart shot a TS% of 47.9% good for 6th worst in the league for players with at least 1500 minutes. His Offensive Win Shares of -0.6 is the 9th worst in the league for players playing at least 1500 minutes. His Offensive Box Plus Minus was 20th worst in the league for players with 1500 minutes played. His Turnover% was 8th worst for the same criteria.

Pretty clear the stats say Smart is a horrid shooter overall, not just from 3, that turns the ball over a bunch and overall is one of the worst offensive players in the league. His shot selection is bad. He forces too many drives which ends up in turnovers, missed shots or blocked shots. He barely involves all 5 offensive players choosing to play a 3 player offense with two players hanging in the corners and over dribbles.

That to me defines offensively limited.

Nick with the stats!

I was just going to respond to the part about Smart being good at driving to the basket - he might be the worst guard I have ever seen at this - but you provided solid proof of why Smart is so limited offensively.

And I am a Smart fan! I really hope we will be able to keep him, but there are a lot of reasons not to match a huge offer sheet.

Re: Jackie Mac on Smart free agency: "he's going for the money"
« Reply #67 on: May 23, 2018, 03:12:25 PM »

Offline BringToughnessBack

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2923
  • Tommy Points: 327
Well, I would hope Smart goes for the highest payout he can get. First free agency and not a player who is suddenly going develop into an offensive shooting force although if he focused on being a facilitator on O, his worth would go even higher.

His worth as someone who can disrupt another team's plans in big games is worth a good deal of money in my opinion. I believe someone will offer him over 10M and could see a desperate losing team sign him in the hopes of changing their demeanor. For a young team stuck in the cycle of losing, he is a great person to sign to teach toughness and grit.

My guess is 52M for 4 years.

Re: Jackie Mac on Smart free agency: "he's going for the money"
« Reply #68 on: May 23, 2018, 03:33:53 PM »

Offline CelticsQuestFor18

  • Aron Baynes
  • Posts: 137
  • Tommy Points: 20
After seeing Noel gambling and turning down 4/70M, I think this makes sense.

I still hope he takes a bit of a pay-cut to stay with us especially if he values a chance at competing for a championship on an annual basis. Like, if SAC or another bad team offers him 4/56M, but the C's offer around 4/48M (also in hopes to stay under the luxury tax threshold for another year), I hope Smart chooses Boston's offer.

But yeah like if he gets offered something absurd like 4 years, 70M+ from another team, then Jackie is right, he's taking the money and running away from us (sadly). We aren't giving him that for sure.

Re: Jackie Mac on Smart free agency: "he's going for the money"
« Reply #69 on: May 23, 2018, 03:37:59 PM »

Offline footey

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7864
  • Tommy Points: 959
Teams just don't pay huge sums of money to offensively limited roles players who are guards, no matter how good they are on defense.

You're talking about people like Andre Roberson who have no functionality in a half court set because they actually cannot shoot the ball. His FT % is something like 40%.

Smart isn't offensively limited. He just can't shoot 3 pointers at a high %. He can still run an offense, drive to the basket, pass the ball, get fouls and make his FTs, post up, etc.  He's still a heck of an old school beat em' up point guard. He has exactly ONE hole in his game. It's just a shame that he lives in the 3 ball era otherwise he'd be such a great player.
Smart shot a total of 36% from the field. Amongst players that played at least 1500 minutes, that was 3rd worst in the league. Smart shot a TS% of 47.9% good for 6th worst in the league for players with at least 1500 minutes. His Offensive Win Shares of -0.6 is the 9th worst in the league for players playing at least 1500 minutes. His Offensive Box Plus Minus was 20th worst in the league for players with 1500 minutes played. His Turnover% was 8th worst for the same criteria.

Pretty clear the stats say Smart is a horrid shooter overall, not just from 3, that turns the ball over a bunch and overall is one of the worst offensive players in the league. His shot selection is bad. He forces too many drives which ends up in turnovers, missed shots or blocked shots. He barely involves all 5 offensive players choosing to play a 3 player offense with two players hanging in the corners and over dribbles.

That to me defines offensively limited.

Glad to see you've come around on him, Nick.  LOL

Re: Jackie Mac on Smart free agency: "he's going for the money"
« Reply #70 on: May 23, 2018, 03:47:49 PM »

Online nickagneta

  • Global Moderator
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33122
  • Tommy Points: 5415
Teams just don't pay huge sums of money to offensively limited roles players who are guards, no matter how good they are on defense.

You're talking about people like Andre Roberson who have no functionality in a half court set because they actually cannot shoot the ball. His FT % is something like 40%.

Smart isn't offensively limited. He just can't shoot 3 pointers at a high %. He can still run an offense, drive to the basket, pass the ball, get fouls and make his FTs, post up, etc.  He's still a heck of an old school beat em' up point guard. He has exactly ONE hole in his game. It's just a shame that he lives in the 3 ball era otherwise he'd be such a great player.
Smart shot a total of 36% from the field. Amongst players that played at least 1500 minutes, that was 3rd worst in the league. Smart shot a TS% of 47.9% good for 6th worst in the league for players with at least 1500 minutes. His Offensive Win Shares of -0.6 is the 9th worst in the league for players playing at least 1500 minutes. His Offensive Box Plus Minus was 20th worst in the league for players with 1500 minutes played. His Turnover% was 8th worst for the same criteria.

Pretty clear the stats say Smart is a horrid shooter overall, not just from 3, that turns the ball over a bunch and overall is one of the worst offensive players in the league. His shot selection is bad. He forces too many drives which ends up in turnovers, missed shots or blocked shots. He barely involves all 5 offensive players choosing to play a 3 player offense with two players hanging in the corners and over dribbles.

That to me defines offensively limited.

Glad to see you've come around on him, Nick.  LOL
I think his intangibles are great and his defense as well. I just think those things can be replaced by a player like Brown becoming a leader and getting a defensive minded guard to replace most of his defense.

I have no problem bringing Smart back but at a price of around $9 million, which I think players like him make. If not at that price get a player like Divicenzo or Grayson Allen to replace him and make Rozier your 6th man with starter minutes.

I also have hated his offensive game. Its one of the worst in the league.

Re: Jackie Mac on Smart free agency: "he's going for the money"
« Reply #71 on: May 23, 2018, 04:03:38 PM »

Offline rocknrollforyoursoul

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5895
  • Tommy Points: 17
I value Smart more now than I used to, but I don't think the Celtics should pay top dollar for him—he's an important role player, but he's still only a role player, and role players shouldn't be getting $15M+ per season.

And though I like what Smart brings to the table—the hustle, the clutch plays—there's an awful lot that he doesn't bring to the table, particularly for someone who plays a position where shooting shouldn't be an issue. I'm talking about his 3pt shooting, but other things as well: he shot only 37% on 2pt jumpers this season (only about 35th percentile), and only 49.5% on layups (only about the 25th percentile; old friend Kelly Olynyk led the league among regulars with 71.2%).

I'd call that "offensively limited."
"There are two kinds of people: those who say to God, 'Thy will be done,' and those to whom God says, 'All right, then, have it your way.'"

"You don't have a soul. You are a Soul. You have a body."

— C.S. Lewis

Re: Jackie Mac on Smart free agency: "he's going for the money"
« Reply #72 on: May 23, 2018, 04:16:08 PM »

Offline Erik

  • Kyrie Irving
  • Posts: 756
  • Tommy Points: 133
  • The voice of reason
Is this the time that I can finally use the "stats don't tell the entire story" line that you people throw at me when I use them to prove to you that Goran Dragic is not even close to being an allstar, for example.

Marcus Smart is the prototype for a person who cannot be quantified by statistics. We all know this. We also all know what he contributes to this team on both ends of the floor.

The problem with "offensively limited" is that you're bundling him into a group of players like Roberson and MKG. If Smart is "offensively limited," so is Ben Simmons.

In a world where there are a lot of really, really bad players on $15mil/yr contracts, I'm almost positive that Smart will get one. He's certainly better than Robert Covington.

Re: Jackie Mac on Smart free agency: "he's going for the money"
« Reply #73 on: May 23, 2018, 06:38:16 PM »

Offline dreamgreen

  • NCE
  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3324
  • Tommy Points: 172
Teams just don't pay huge sums of money to offensively limited roles players who are guards, no matter how good they are on defense.

You're talking about people like Andre Roberson who have no functionality in a half court set because they actually cannot shoot the ball. His FT % is something like 40%.

Smart isn't offensively limited. He just can't shoot 3 pointers at a high %. He can still run an offense, drive to the basket, pass the ball, get fouls and make his FTs, post up, etc.  He's still a heck of an old school beat em' up point guard. He has exactly ONE hole in his game. It's just a shame that he lives in the 3 ball era otherwise he'd be such a great player.
Smart shot a total of 36% from the field. Amongst players that played at least 1500 minutes, that was 3rd worst in the league. Smart shot a TS% of 47.9% good for 6th worst in the league for players with at least 1500 minutes. His Offensive Win Shares of -0.6 is the 9th worst in the league for players playing at least 1500 minutes. His Offensive Box Plus Minus was 20th worst in the league for players with 1500 minutes played. His Turnover% was 8th worst for the same criteria.

Pretty clear the stats say Smart is a horrid shooter overall, not just from 3, that turns the ball over a bunch and overall is one of the worst offensive players in the league. His shot selection is bad. He forces too many drives which ends up in turnovers, missed shots or blocked shots. He barely involves all 5 offensive players choosing to play a 3 player offense with two players hanging in the corners and over dribbles.

That to me defines offensively limited.

I can't tell you how refreshing it is to see someone that gets it! Thank you!

Re: Jackie Mac on Smart free agency: "he's going for the money"
« Reply #74 on: May 23, 2018, 06:42:17 PM »

Offline Dino Pitino

  • NCE
  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1821
  • Tommy Points: 218
I'm just not worried about this. I don't believe Smart is going to get a big offer from anyone, maybe $12m tops, probably a good bit less. Boston should be able to match any offer I expect him to get.

Teams just don't pay huge sums of money to offensively limited roles players who are guards, no matter how good they are on defense.

I agree. Is there gonna be a single team that makes the big bet that Smart can be a plus offensive player?
"Young man, you have the question backwards." - Bill Russell

"My guess is that an aggregator of expert opinions would be close in terms of results to that of Danny." - Roy H.