Getting Smart with Statistics
- Thread starter JakeRae
- Start date
Instead of the ball?
I suppose it would be the most likely way for Markelle to get something in the hoop from a distance.
I suppose it would be the most likely way for Markelle to get something in the hoop from a distance.
I think there's a real chance he shoots close to 40% from deep this year, and i don't think he's going to be shy with the attempts either.
He is shooting 30% from three on the year at this point. What makes you think he is a 40% shooter?
The assumption that he continues his growth from last season? The fact that his shot looks great. I posted in this very thread before last season saying i thought he would get into the mid 30s, and that worked out.
He started last year 3-20 from three, and still managed to finish over 36%. Im not really concerned about his percentage after four games.
Marcus is talking trash about the halftime show.
View: https://twitter.com/smart_MS3/status/1189754963712466944
View: https://twitter.com/smart_MS3/status/1189754963712466944
40% is a pretty big stretch, but his form the past 2 years is noticeably different and cleaner. I think fluctuating around 34-38% is pretty likely, although he needs to cut out the tough attempts that he's started jacking this year.
Agreed that he should tone down some of the tomfoolery and in the overall assessment. I think that he has turned himself into an average shooter from distance, which is awesome.
An underrated aspect of Marcus is his continuing development on the offensive end. He'll never be confused for a top offensive guard. But he was a poor shooting, poor handle, bad distributor 2 guard entering the league. He was always a great defender, but he was basically a 4 in a 1s body. He's now a credible ballhandle with good vision who can shoot. Kudos to him.
Can anyone tell me what this actually means? How would you use that to your advantage?
I suspect you are referring to the wisdom Smarf passed on to his teammates and I am not sure it applies beyond say, him and maybe Patrick Beverley or Draymond Green or Jrue Holiday.
That said, Smarf is like a smaller defensive back with plus strength and athleticism as well as an incredible feel for the game. He knew what the scheme the Bucks were running and effectively jumped the route of/locked down the targeted "receiver". He is so good at getting leverage in just about any match-up that he has the ability to slow much bigger players.
Losing what Horford brings to the team was tough but Boston is incredibly fortunate that they have Smarf as the team's leader and de facto captain. I strongly suspect their good team defense is partly a function of Stevens' scheme but also as a result of Smart being their defensive traffic director. If you watch him when the other team is bringing the ball down, he is almost always making sure his teammates are either in the right place or that they know where they need to go. That alone is incredibly valuable regardless of whether he shoots 30 or 40% from deep.
Smart does a lot with his kamikaze attitude, his strength, and his ability to use that lower center of gravity to push big men off their spots. So I think he's just telling them "Don't be like Kyrie and play fake straight up defense on these guys, use your quickness to play ball denial, cut off entry angles, etc.."
One advantage to being smaller may be taking charges. When big men are backing down their defender in the post, they're not as used to the counterweight of smaller bodies, so they're probably at risk of applying unnecessary force and warranting a charge call. Another version of this is inducing a drive by a big guy but using your smaller stature and quicker feet to get in position. Smart is so strong that I'm not sure the post thing even applies to him but it could be a slight advantage in certain situations for smaller guards.
It’s like nighthob said—most guards, when caught in a post mismatch, default to guarding the guy straight up.
Smart does sometimes uses his strength to hold his ground, but he also aggressively looks to:
- front
- swipe the ball
- bait a charge
- move his feet
It’s not purely a case of Marcus Smart telling people to just be Marcus Smart. It’s very different from what most smaller guys do around the league, and requires a different mindset.
Smart does sometimes uses his strength to hold his ground, but he also aggressively looks to:
- front
- swipe the ball
- bait a charge
- move his feet
It’s not purely a case of Marcus Smart telling people to just be Marcus Smart. It’s very different from what most smaller guys do around the league, and requires a different mindset.
I think the quote in the tweet was missing a "not". Or that's how I read it.
So, even though it isn't your natural position, you have a particular set of skills, skills acquired over a long career, that can make you a nightmare for people you are defending.
The sentences that follow make no sense under this reading. “You’re a guard” is a repeated emphasis of the thing smaller players are, as juxtaposed against them not being a 4. Simplified, Smart is saying, you’re not a big, you’re a guard, use those skills when you switch onto bigger players. Or, stripped of context even more, what Smart is saying is a version of the generally applicable advice in almost all contexts that success is built on embracing your strengths and using them to your advantage.
Oddly, though, I think both are saying the same thing. 'Don't let the natural 4 use their size advantage, use your own (quickness, e.g.) advantage against them'? I could also be mis-reading through the foggy lens of insomnia....
This is what I took it to mean. "Play to your (comparative) strengths" is another way of saying it.
That is a nice play by Smart - but man, what a lousy play by Bledsoe. Picks up his dribble that allows no spacing for the entry pass then misses the pass by several feet - and all with 13 seconds still left on the shot clock
It’s also a good play by Semi. Smart fronts his man and it works because Semi jumps and closes to make the lob entry too risky. One of the things we have to focus on with such small lineups is having consistent on ball pressure to make those types of passes difficult
Your periodic Marcus Smarf highlight:
View: https://twitter.com/maxacarlin/status/1191891660046831616?s=20
Edit: Kevin Love entered this game shooting 41.5% from deep while averaging a career high 6.8 3PA thus far this season. Smarf held him to 20% tonight. That defense on Love with the C's up by three near the end was textbook.
Smarf Island
View: https://twitter.com/maxacarlin/status/1191891660046831616?s=20
Edit: Kevin Love entered this game shooting 41.5% from deep while averaging a career high 6.8 3PA thus far this season. Smarf held him to 20% tonight. That defense on Love with the C's up by three near the end was textbook.
Smarf Island
Last edited:
I have never seen a 6-3 guy do anything like this consistently. It's amazing. He has such a deep and versatile defensive bag too--it's not like he just relies on a guy getting cold on some fadeaways.
Are we at a point where the Celtics need to think about keeping him in the starting lineup, and going back to bringing Brown off the bench?
I think the minutes would still be there for Brown, and having his contract dealt with makes it easier to do that.
I think the minutes would still be there for Brown, and having his contract dealt with makes it easier to do that.
Brown adds a lot more on offense, so I imagine they want as many minutes for him as possible.
I think they'll treat it more as "Smart is a good option if Brown gets in foul trouble defending bigs."
Brown also brings a lot of defensive versatility too, so I don’t think so much is gained putting Smart in for him. If I were to send one of the wings to the bench it would probably be Hayward, to run the offense for the second unit, but ultimately I think starting is a red herring, what will matter is who is out there to close out games, and that will be more matchup dependent.
Exactly, wrt the bolded. They'll almost certainly keep the normal starting lineup, and then try to get 32-37 minutes for the top 5 guys, depending on matchups and game situation.
Last year's starting lineup changes were about getting pressure of Hayward+Brown, as well as making Kyrie happy (he clearly wanted Smart in the lineup). None of those factors apply now, and Hayward and Brown are both playing great.
Any chance you could drop some Twitter follows for Weird Celtics Twitter?
I want to get even more all in on Smart, and that seems to me a necessary component.
If the alternative were someone demonstrably weaker than Smart, then maybe. Brown isn't that.
Smart is the defensive equivalent of Vinnie Microwave coming off the Pistons' bench.
In some ways starting doesn't matter, but in other ways it does. When you have the "first team" out there for 5-7 minutes at the start of the game and 5-7 minutes at the start of the 3rd, whoever comes off the bench just doesn't seem to get as many minutes as the first teamers. So, the Celtics need to start their 4 best players and I think that is Tatum, Walker, Brown, and Hayward. Smart is a great player, and does a lot of great things, but I think he's not in the top 4.
As to who closes the games, I think that is a game by game decision based on matchups, who's playing well, etc., etc.
The case for starting Smart is that he's the better defender... and alongside Kemba, Hayward, and JT, you don't need another scorer. Whereas Brown can come in midway through the 1st and help to anchor the bench lineups.
The downside of it is that the team basically has 3 playmakers (Kemba, Hayward, Smart) so better not to have them all in the same lineup.
I think all 5 guys should be looking at 30+ minutes, though, regardless of who starts.
The downside of it is that the team basically has 3 playmakers (Kemba, Hayward, Smart) so better not to have them all in the same lineup.
I think all 5 guys should be looking at 30+ minutes, though, regardless of who starts.
I just was telling him, you know, especially when everything is going that way, like, they're just picking and picking, and it's like they're eyeing on me and it's like they are doing it on purpose," Smart said. "So I'm telling them like, 'At some point you have to step in and say something as a coach. But since you won't, I've got to.'
"I understand from Brad's standpoint, but at the same time, from the player's standpoint, like, you've got to step in.
"Me and Brad, that's our relationship," Smart said. "We've been in it six years, so we have those little moments, and it's over and over. It's done with, and we move on to the next one."
Said Stevens: "We need Marcus, and I've told him a number of times how much we need him. But this is the part about Marcus that I love, right? His fire, his competitiveness. If there's a moment when he's upset with us, that's all part of it. We move on pretty quickly. We've been together a long time. I've been yelled at before and that's OK. I love him and I trust him. And he'll get every opportunity."
"We've been through a lot together, so I just think it's one of those things where he knows how important he is to our team," Stevens said. "He gives a lot to our team. He does a lot of things that are really hard but don't always get the attention by some.
"I think we do a good job in Boston of recognizing all that he does, and certainly our team and our staff recognize all he does. That's all good stuff."
"I understand from Brad's standpoint, but at the same time, from the player's standpoint, like, you've got to step in.
"Me and Brad, that's our relationship," Smart said. "We've been in it six years, so we have those little moments, and it's over and over. It's done with, and we move on to the next one."
Said Stevens: "We need Marcus, and I've told him a number of times how much we need him. But this is the part about Marcus that I love, right? His fire, his competitiveness. If there's a moment when he's upset with us, that's all part of it. We move on pretty quickly. We've been together a long time. I've been yelled at before and that's OK. I love him and I trust him. And he'll get every opportunity."
"We've been through a lot together, so I just think it's one of those things where he knows how important he is to our team," Stevens said. "He gives a lot to our team. He does a lot of things that are really hard but don't always get the attention by some.
"I think we do a good job in Boston of recognizing all that he does, and certainly our team and our staff recognize all he does. That's all good stuff."
From an article on Celtics.com:
“I love it,” Smart said of matching up against bigs. “It’s a challenge that I love every single time I get the call. I pride myself on the defensive end. That’s where I earn my keep. So when I’m matched up against those guys, I never think it’s a disadvantage for me. I think it’s an advantage for me on both ends.”
Seriously, him on Porzingis should've been an embarrassment for him. Instead it was embarrassing the other way. Did Porzingis end up fouling out, or did he just leave the court early in the 4th with 5 fouls and not return?
The Celtics seem to be taking something to its logical conclusion, which is that even if you have 6 inches on a guy (or, in Porzingis’ case, a freaking foot), it doesn’t matter of you don’t have the strength or quickness to put him under the basket.
All you get for your height without that is a contested 15 footer, and while “just shoot over him” sounds great in theory, it’s pretty inefficient offense unless you’re KD or Kawhi. Especially when Marcus is taking your cookies half the time you turn around to face up.
Of course you need big burly boys to bang with the guys in the league who ARE big and skilled enough to just move you under the hoop every time, but there are like 5 of those.
All you get for your height without that is a contested 15 footer, and while “just shoot over him” sounds great in theory, it’s pretty inefficient offense unless you’re KD or Kawhi. Especially when Marcus is taking your cookies half the time you turn around to face up.
Of course you need big burly boys to bang with the guys in the league who ARE big and skilled enough to just move you under the hoop every time, but there are like 5 of those.
What Smart is doing is making teams play, or attempt to play, old school post basketball, and players just are not used to it.
"Hey, I have 5 or 6 inches on this guy, I can back him down!"
But they have very little experience doing that, so they end up taking a contested shot from a very inefficient range. A shot they also likely don't have a lot of experience with.
"Hey, I have 5 or 6 inches on this guy, I can back him down!"
But they have very little experience doing that, so they end up taking a contested shot from a very inefficient range. A shot they also likely don't have a lot of experience with.
This is an excellent post.
So while playing smaller is the buzz phrase in the NBA, I think teams are actually playing STRONGER. It makes guys like Smart, PJ Tucker, Draymond Green, Montrez Harrell, Aron Baynes and eventually Grant Williams important player types regardless of their heights.
