Getting Smart with Statistics

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
34,715
I’m a Smart fan, but I’m actually not that confident he knows to limit his shots. Didn’t he have a 1-10 game from 3 or something like that? I remember his teammates told him to keep on shooting. Unfortunately, teammates don’t often really tell you the truth
If Smart goes 1-11 from deep regularly, the Celtics have a problem. He also had a game this year where he was 5-11 and a streak where he went: 4-9, 4-7, 4-8 and 5-9. If you don't want the games where he misses, you should not want him shooting on those good nights too.

I know its what we do here but we seem to be drawing big conclusions from small sample sizes. Or maybe I am misunderstanding the points being made. In my view, Smart's shooting isn't great but he does enough to be very valuable for this team on most nights. Unless he is part of a true upgrade transaction, it makes little sense to trade him given that he is one of the team's primary facilitators and defenders. As I posted upthread, I suspect he has a very specific market and unless you think he is no better than a low first and some bench filler, I am not sure what the objective is. Its more than likely that any Smart trade would weaken this team overall.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
6,887
Kiev, Ukraine
If Smart goes 1-11 from deep regularly, the Celtics have a problem. He also had a game this year where he was 5-11 and a streak where he went: 4-9, 4-7, 4-8 and 5-9. If you don't want the games where he misses, you should not want him shooting on those good nights too.

I know its what we do here but we seem to be drawing big conclusions from small sample sizes. Or maybe I am misunderstanding the points being made. In my view, Smart's shooting isn't great but he does enough to be very valuable for this team on most nights. Unless he is part of a true upgrade transaction, it makes little sense to trade him given that he is one of the team's primary facilitators and defenders. As I posted upthread, I suspect he has a very specific market and unless you think he is no better than a low first and some bench filler, I am not sure what the objective is. Its more than likely that any Smart trade would weaken this team overall.
There are a few different issues being discussed:

1. Willingness to trade Smart. I'm not rushing to trade him, for the reasons you mention, but if they decide to keep Hayward, I think he eventually needs to get moved as a mild asset/salary match to re-balance the roster.

2. Smart's 3-point shooting. I try not to get too high or too low--he is what he is, a 34-37% 3PT shooter if he controls the quality of those looks and doesn't get too frisky off the dribble or with high volume. The team as a whole seems to have made a conscious decision on offense to limit non-Kemba 3s unless they're good looks or late clock, in favor of attacking mismatches to try and get to the rim. Smart doesn't really seem to have gotten the memo on this--shots that were once ok become worse as your team's overall offensive potential goes up.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
9,279
I don’t think Smart is pertinent to Hayward. Because I don’t think that they can afford to bring Hayward back unless he signs a Brown-like deal. Which just isn’t happening.
 

Eddie Jurak

Go Leafs Go
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
27,967
Melrose, MA
I know its what we do here but we seem to be drawing big conclusions from small sample sizes. Or maybe I am misunderstanding the points being made. In my view, Smart's shooting isn't great but he does enough to be very valuable for this team on most nights. Unless he is part of a true upgrade transaction, it makes little sense to trade him given that he is one of the team's primary facilitators and defenders. As I posted upthread, I suspect he has a very specific market and unless you think he is no better than a low first and some bench filler, I am not sure what the objective is. Its more than likely that any Smart trade would weaken this team overall.
Both the team, and Smart, have been going through some things this year. I'd like to reserve judgment until he and the team are back at 100%, or reasonably close to that.

I think he's a great fit here still because he contributes in different ways than the rest of the Celtics' top 5. He's made a meaningful offensive improvement this year that no one mentions: a drastic reduction in turnovers even as he continues to be one of the key facilitators on the team.

Yes, he has notable flaws, but the perfect is the enemy of the good.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
6,887
Kiev, Ukraine
I guess my reservation about Smart goes more along the lines of: as the Jays progress, and once the Celtics have an off-season or two to rebalance the roster (it’s not that hard to find Baynes and Lopii equivalents), would you rather have Marcus Smart or a Danny Green type long-term? The answer for me is pretty clearly the latter.
 

benhogan

Granite is his new binky
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
9,335
Santa Monica
I guess my reservation about Smart goes more along the lines of: as the Jays progress, and once the Celtics have an off-season or two to rebalance the roster (it’s not that hard to find Baynes and Lopii equivalents), would you rather have Marcus Smart or a Danny Green type long-term? The answer for me is pretty clearly the latter.
BTW Baynes looks pretty cooked (worn down to a nub:eek:)*
After playing all summer for Oz + major minutes the first 30 games he's completely drained of energy. He needs a reboot with the summer off (maybe it will keep away any interest?)

No worries, plenty of 5s that have a similar skill set.


*The same thing happened to Gasol. I could see him being added this summer by a shrewd GM for pennies on the dollar ($5MM or less)
 
Last edited:

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
6,887
Kiev, Ukraine
BTW Baynes looks pretty cooked (worn down to a nub:eek:)*
After playing all summer for Oz + major minutes the first 30 games he's completely drained of energy. He needs a reboot with the summer off (maybe it will keep away any interest?)

No worries, plenty of 5s that have a similar skill set.


*The same thing happened to Gasol. I could see him being added this summer by a shrewd GM for pennies on the dollar ($5MM or less)
Yeah, I’d be interested in collecting and shrinkwrapping older centers with good defense and smarts. It’s just a challenge for any coach to stay disciplined enough to not overplay them (Brad was actually quite good about that with Baynes imo, and we’ve seen what happens when Phoenix tried to use him as a full-time regular season starter—Nub City!)
 

benhogan

Granite is his new binky
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
9,335
Santa Monica
Both the team, and Smart, have been going through some things this year. I'd like to reserve judgment until he and the team are back at 100%, or reasonably close to that.

I think he's a great fit here still because he contributes in different ways than the rest of the Celtics' top 5. He's made a meaningful offensive improvement this year that no one mentions: a drastic reduction in turnovers even as he continues to be one of the key facilitators on the team.

Yes, he has notable flaws, but the perfect is the enemy of the good.
Yea, I'm more inclined to stick the "C" on Smart's chest and look to keep him longer. Have Brad/Danny tell him he doesn't need to be an offensive/scoring star to be important to the Celtics. The Celtics will have alpha scorers in Tatum, Brown, Kemba (potentially Romeo?) in the years to come. I'm sure they can find 3pt snipers off the bench without dealing Marcus.


Yeah, I’d be interested in collecting and shrinkwrapping older centers with good defense and smarts. It’s just a challenge for any coach to stay disciplined enough to not overplay them (Brad was actually quite good about that with Baynes imo, and we’ve seen what happens when Phoenix tried to use him as a full-time regular season starter—Nub City!)
ha, the Brad machine with three experienced Centers (@~$5MM/each) works well with a wing heavy roster.

The intensity Baynes & Gasol play for their country, all summer, was noble but kills their future free-agent value. the Celtics could be the beneficiary of that.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
4,155
around the way
I get where lovegtm is coming from, with Marcus going all bombs away since he came back (and poorly at that). But what it comes down to is whether one thinks that Marcus is enough of a team player to accept the coaching and the smaller scoring role and to focus on the glue and wetwork that he does so well. I think that he is.

Upon reflection, I do see more clearly the redundancy of "secondary, non-ballhandler initiator" that Marcus shares with Gordon. Long-term that possibly makes one a casualty of the tax, and I defer to you finance guys. That role is only part of what MS and GH bring to the table though, and I don't see a ton of overlap between their roles otherwise (or the other wings frankly) except insamuch as GH overlaps in scoring with JT and JB (assuming again that Marcus accepts fewer shots).
 

Eddie Jurak

Go Leafs Go
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
27,967
Melrose, MA
Upon reflection, I do see more clearly the redundancy of "secondary, non-ballhandler initiator" that Marcus shares with Gordon.
I see no such redundancy. We are now in year 5 of the Celtics primary point guard being a score first guy. During that span we’ve had 3 different players in the role, and all of them were trade or free agent acquisitions.

It is very, very clear at this point t that what Danny and Brad want in a PG is a 20+ PPG scorer who is not a black hole but is also not the primary facilitator in the lineup. Playmaking on Brad Stevens’ teams has been a group effort relying on a handful of guys, some of whom are also starters.

Smart’s playmaking isn’t really redundant on this team.
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
4,343
The Celtics have Hayward's Bird rights, correct? So, my limited understanding of capology is that the Celtics can keep Tatum and Hayward and Smart without any real issue to the cap. There is, of course, an issue with Wyc's wallet - but that's not really my concern. The Celtics will be over the cap, but they are over the cap anyway.

My understanding, very limited at best, is that if Hayward opts out and leaves - the Celtics wouldn't be able to sign a max free agent to replace him (unless of course Hayward goes to a team where a sign and trade is possible). So, unless you think Hayward would be a bad contract, it's better to sign him then watch him go away without any replacement (all of this assumes he plays well the rest of this season).
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
4,155
around the way
I see no such redundancy. We are now in year 5 of the Celtics primary point guard being a score first guy. During that span we’ve had 3 different players in the role, and all of them were trade or free agent acquisitions.

It is very, very clear at this point t that what Danny and Brad want in a PG is a 20+ PPG scorer who is not a black hole but is also not the primary facilitator in the lineup. Playmaking on Brad Stevens’ teams has been a group effort relying on a handful of guys, some of whom are also starters.

Smart’s playmaking isn’t really redundant on this team.
I'm not saying that Smart's ballhandling is redundant. I'm saying that Kemba + ballhandler2 (currently BW) + GH + MS is more ballhandling than they need, if getting the tax bill down is a thing.

I'm also saying that I think that both GH and MS do enough other important things that it's irrelevant if they overlap as initiators.
 

Eddie Jurak

Go Leafs Go
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
27,967
Melrose, MA
I'm not saying that Smart's ballhandling is redundant. I'm saying that Kemba + ballhandler2 (currently BW) + GH + MS is more ballhandling than they need, if getting the tax bill down is a thing.
Im not sure what the difference is between “redundant” and “more than they need”, but in any case I disagree with the latter point. BW is just another guy and shouldn’t factor into the argument at all. Smart and Hayward are stylistically different in how they playmake and both are valuable on this team.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
4,155
around the way
Im not sure what the difference is between “redundant” and “more than they need”, but in any case I disagree with the latter point. BW is just another guy and shouldn’t factor into the argument at all. Smart and Hayward are stylistically different in how they playmake and both are valuable on this team.
Ok so they both playmake but are different, so having both is a good idea. Agreed.
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
4,343
From Masslive, Smart lost 6 pounds while he was out with the eye infection. Some of that is likely just depleted glycogen and the associated water weight, which would come back quickly. But, some is also likely muscle.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
10,917
The Celtics have Hayward's Bird rights, correct? So, my limited understanding of capology is that the Celtics can keep Tatum and Hayward and Smart without any real issue to the cap. There is, of course, an issue with Wyc's wallet - but that's not really my concern. The Celtics will be over the cap, but they are over the cap anyway.

My understanding, very limited at best, is that if Hayward opts out and leaves - the Celtics wouldn't be able to sign a max free agent to replace him (unless of course Hayward goes to a team where a sign and trade is possible). So, unless you think Hayward would be a bad contract, it's better to sign him then watch him go away without any replacement (all of this assumes he plays well the rest of this season).
All of this is correct; the Celtics will be over the cap for quite some time. A couple of caveats, however:

1.) The Celtics would be paying luxury tax, and there are some restrictions for tax-paying teams when it comes to the amount of mid-level exception money they can offer veteran free agents to fill out the roster. And I think there are some complexities around sign-and-trades for taxpaying teams. Not sure that a prospective Hayward deal would have much impact, as they may very well be over the tax apron with or without Hayward.

2.) Like you, I don't care about Wyc's wallet. But our votes don't count. The recent statements of the owner of a local professional sports team 3.0 miles down the road from TD Garden indicate that sometimes team owners get twitchy about the amount of luxury tax payments, to the point of forcing the front office to make suboptimal decisions around resigning key free agents. There are repeater taxes in the NBA; not sure what Danny's equivalent to a Betts/Price trade would be, but I'd rather not think about it.

FWIW, the excellent NBA CBA FAQ page gives me a 404 error when I try to access it. I hope it didn't disappear, as that was the one resource that I could find that thoroughly explained the CBA in plain English.
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
4,343
I understand the point, but the NBA is even more of a player's league than baseball is. If the Celtics were do decide to trade Tatum for flotsam and jetsam to save money, I think that would have a much more negative impact on the value of the franchise than trading Betts would - in my opinion.

The Celtics seem to be on the beginning of a bit of a 'Golden Era'. They've got 2 young stars on the upswing (the second of which will hopefully sign a long-term deal in the next few years), and they are contenders for the conference championship. It only takes a few bad moves to wreck all that and go back to the dark ages of ML Carr and Rick Pitino. I personally gave up basketball for awhile during those years. In this sports town, no one needs to be loyal to ineptitude.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
10,917
I understand the point, but the NBA is even more of a player's league than baseball is. If the Celtics were do decide to trade Tatum for flotsam and jetsam to save money, I think that would have a much more negative impact on the value of the franchise than trading Betts would - in my opinion.

The Celtics seem to be on the beginning of a bit of a 'Golden Era'. They've got 2 young stars on the upswing (the second of which will hopefully sign a long-term deal in the next few years), and they are contenders for the conference championship. It only takes a few bad moves to wreck all that and go back to the dark ages of ML Carr and Rick Pitino. I personally gave up basketball for awhile during those years. In this sports town, no one needs to be loyal to ineptitude.
I threw in the disaster scenario as not as something that is likely to happen. Or even something that could happen. Just pointing out that every owner has their budget, and unfortunately the luxury tax does have to be taken into account when assessing signings and re-signings, and so the possibility does exist that Hayward is gone after this year (to be fair, he could be gone anyway, as free agents are free to go where they want). The good news is that Danny and Wyc seem to be on the same page when it comes to spending Wyc's money, which was not the case with the franchise down the road.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
9,279
The Celtics have Hayward's Bird rights, correct? So, my limited understanding of capology is that the Celtics can keep Tatum and Hayward and Smart without any real issue to the cap. There is, of course, an issue with Wyc's wallet - but that's not really my concern. The Celtics will be over the cap, but they are over the cap anyway.

My understanding, very limited at best, is that if Hayward opts out and leaves - the Celtics wouldn't be able to sign a max free agent to replace him (unless of course Hayward goes to a team where a sign and trade is possible). So, unless you think Hayward would be a bad contract, it's better to sign him then watch him go away without any replacement (all of this assumes he plays well the rest of this season).
The issue is the repeater tax gets very expensive as the Thunder found out when their payroll expenses neared $300 million. As for Hayward leaving, he isn't going to one of the rebuilding teams under the cap. If he wants to go, it will be to chase a ring somewhere like Golden State, LA, or Milwaukee. Those are all going to be sign & trade transactions where Boston can fashion a TPE to use to add talent after.
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
4,343
What is Smart's fascination with launching 3PAs a few feet past the arc? I wasn't able to watch the whole game last night, but I thought in the first half he had 3-4 pretty deep threes. I think he might have hit one, but the others were hard misses. I just feel like his %success rate on those deep shots is pretty low. If he cleaned that up by simply looking for a better shot, his overall efficiency would improve. I'm just getting a bit tired of seeing short trips on the offensive end because the Celtics put up a terrible shot from deep outside. It just seems lazy to me.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
6,887
Kiev, Ukraine
It's nice to see Smart's legs back under him after the sickness. Hopefully his defense can get back to normal next...he's been more reputation than performance since coming back.

His shot looks good generally...I just wish he would apply the "would Tatum take this shot" test to every 3 he takes, he'd cut out those 2-4 crappy shots per game that he's probably a ~20-25% shooter on.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
34,715
His shot looks good generally...I just wish he would apply the "would Tatum take this shot" test to every 3 he takes, he'd cut out those 2-4 crappy shots per game that he's probably a ~20-25% shooter on.
To quote the early aughts philosopher Marlo Stanfield, "you want it to be one way...but its the other way".

In my experience, acceptance is a path to appreciating Smarf and life in general.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
3,456
I wanted to agree with you, but he teased me with restraint in prior games. (yes, phrasing)
I think he's been better with his restraint this year.

When he's on the floor with 3 of Kemba/Tatum/Jaylen/Hayward, he's shooting a bit under 10 times per 36 minutes.
When he's on the floor with 2 or less of those guys, he's shooting a bit over 15 times per 36 minutes.

That feels OK to me. Since the rest of the Celtics wings/guards outside of their core 5 are poor or worse shooters from the perimeter, a Smart shot in those instances is probably as good a shot as they'll get.

They really need a sixth non-center who can shoot the ball.
 

InstaFace

MDLzera
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
14,964
Pittsburgh, PA
To quote the early aughts philosopher Marlo Stanfield, "you want it to be one way...but its the other way".

In my experience, acceptance is a path to appreciating Smarf and life in general.
“The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man.”
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
42,282
Did you ever think you would see a day where, in his previous 2 games, Marcus Smart hit 16 three-pointers?
 

benhogan

Granite is his new binky
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
9,335
Santa Monica
Did you ever think you would see a day where, in his previous 2 games, Marcus Smart hit 16 three-pointers?
I'm not sure if I should be excited or worried that "offensively confident" Marcus will be in full greenlight mode for the rest of the seasono_O
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
6,887
Kiev, Ukraine
A big game for Marcus last night and just like that he's up to 35.5%
35.5 on 6.6 attempts/game is...kind of totally fine? He mostly seems to press when the team has absolutely nothing going offensively, which I suppose is understandable.

If he were on any other team and didn't have his irrational confidence rep, we'd all just be like: "oh yeah, guess that guy who used to be bad at shooting learned to shoot. Cool."
 

Lazy vs Crazy

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
3,602
35.5 on 6.6 attempts/game is...kind of totally fine? He mostly seems to press when the team has absolutely nothing going offensively, which I suppose is understandable.

If he were on any other team and didn't have his irrational confidence rep, we'd all just be like: "oh yeah, guess that guy who used to be bad at shooting learned to shoot. Cool."
Tatum is shooting the same percentage (well, 35.6%)on 6.5 attempts per game for context
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
34,715
“The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man.”
GBS was a brilliant man but I am not sure that even he or even an unreasonable cyborg designer is going to create a NBA player who is perfect in every regard.

It may be good to be unreasonable about political regimes or inefficient processes but no amount of unreasonableness will make Marcus Smarf be 100% efficient in every decision or play he makes. Imo, nothing will change the fact that even the best of the best aren't perfect and never will be. That is the beauty of following sports like the NBA - getting those rare moments where everything works.
 
Last edited:

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
6,887
Kiev, Ukraine
It may be good to be unreasonable about political regimes or inefficient processes but no amount of unreasonableness will make Marcus Smarf be 100% efficient in every decision or play he makes. Imo, nothing will change the fact that even the best of the best aren't perfect and never will be. That is the beauty of following sports like the NBA - getting those rare moments where everything works.
Meh, I think this is selling short both his BBIQ and normal, being a smart person, IQ. In the games Kemba has played recently, he's shown a lot of restraint in shooting off the dribble 3s early shot-clock, and has also attacked the paint really aggressively.

Everything about Smart gets exaggerated a bit because he's a larger-than-life personality (in a good way). Even his simple drives+floaters feel like Combat Basketball. But at the core, he's a smart guard, with a solid catch-and-shoot 3, who is only 25 and has steadily improved his secondary playmaking over the years. I don't see any reason he can't build on that and cut down on some of the questionable decisions.
 

Koufax

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
4,686
Thanks for the reminder that he's 25. It feels like he's been on the team for 25 years.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
6,887
Kiev, Ukraine
He’s only a year older now than Brogdon was his rookie year, which is crazy. I’m decently optimistic that he still has room to add to his game and also improve shooting further.
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
4,343
I've been very impressed with his passing lately. I was very afraid after his 11 3P he would start chucking up shots like it's the end of the world, but he really hasn't. Aside from about one ugly drive per game, I've been quite pleased with what he's been doing on the offensive end. He's taking open 3 pointers, and he's been making great passes to his teammates.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
6,887
Kiev, Ukraine
I've been very impressed with his passing lately. I was very afraid after his 11 3P he would start chucking up shots like it's the end of the world, but he really hasn't. Aside from about one ugly drive per game, I've been quite pleased with what he's been doing on the offensive end. He's taking open 3 pointers, and he's been making great passes to his teammates.
Yeah when Kemba is out there he clearly feels less need to press. It’s great to see.
 

JakeRae

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
6,604
New York, NY
Smart has always been a pretty good passer, although he’s been flashing more creativity lately. The thing that’s really changed this year though is he has slashed his turnover rate to under 10% as against a career average around 15%. For comparison, among guards and wings that have played meaningful minutes and have assist rates over 15%, Smart is at 20.9%, Smart is tied with Mitchell for 6th (7th if you add in Kyrie) for lowest turnover rate. Players who have taken better care of the ball are Monte Morris, McCollum, Okobo, Barton, and Alec Burks.
 

TripleOT

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2007
3,051
The next improvement I'd like to see from Smart is for him to be more efficient inside the arc. Unless the shot clock is all the way down, Smart should not be taking any shots outside the paint.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
6,887
Kiev, Ukraine
The next improvement I'd like to see from Smart is for him to be more efficient inside the arc. Unless the shot clock is all the way down, Smart should not be taking any shots outside the paint.
??? He's a good FT shooter with decent touch. He actually probably needs to work some on adding a 12-15 footer, which we saw him bust out some against Orlando. It's a pretty important tool for the type of guard they want him to be, and the type he'll need to be once Hayward ages out and Smart hits his next contract, just for team salary structure.

He's also a good enough passer that when teams have to overplay that short mid-ranger, a lot of passes down low will open up. His equity on that shot isn't just it's raw %: it's the additional passes for high % shots it creates.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
6,887
Kiev, Ukraine
Love this play by Smart (video below is linked to time of the play). He beats Gordon without a screen, then sets up the trademark Tatum-Theis snake dribble+seal. Theis gets the seal and Smart thinks he has a layup, but reads Fultz helping at the last second and makes the pass to Grant for an open corner 3.

View: https://youtu.be/ew0rVlCd4aQ?t=338
 

TripleOT

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2007
3,051
??? He's a good FT shooter with decent touch. He actually probably needs to work some on adding a 12-15 footer, which we saw him bust out some against Orlando. It's a pretty important tool for the type of guard they want him to be, and the type he'll need to be once Hayward ages out and Smart hits his next contract, just for team salary structure.

He's also a good enough passer that when teams have to overplay that short mid-ranger, a lot of passes down low will open up. His equity on that shot isn't just it's raw %: it's the additional passes for high % shots it creates.
Smart is at 36.7% on non-layup twos, 59.5% on layups, and 35.1% from three. I think he could do a better job when he dribble drives and posts up for his turnaround jumper from short range, and with his floater. He rushes a lot of these shots. Smart is way too strong for many defenders, and should be using that strength better. For example, Jaylen Brown is 43.9% on non-layup twos. He used to be shakier from short range, but this season he's getting to his spots, taking his shots under control, and getting to the line around 30% more too.