I agree with this. While Smart certainly has been missing open shots, he's also taking contested threes with the second unit probably because he and Rozier are the only creators on the floor.
The reason I disagree with this reasoning is that Smart has always been an unconscious gunner dating back to his OK State days. In his four NBA seasons he's averaged the following per36 3-point FGA.....5.4, 5.2, 5.0, and this year 5.4. In college he was 4.7 and 6.5 per40 behind the arc while shooting a combined 29.5%. I don't see any evidence that this season there is any difference to his approach based on personnel.
Reasonable, though at OK ST he was the best scorer on the team and other than IT he has been among the couple best creators on all his Celtics teams. I get your concern and you may be right in the end---but he is playing with his best teammates offensively now and I have seen some signs of adjusting to that. But sure---it may well not end up being material too
Even if that is true and nothing changes with Marcus Smart, surrounding him with bad shooters probably compounds the problem. The last 2 games have shown us what happens when we have another guard who can score efficiently off the bench and hit their 3s. Smart also hit 48.8% of his 2 pointers in college, while coming into this season, he was at 42.0% in the NBA. This year he's at a career low 32.7%. He might bounce back to his career averages but I don't have hope he'll ever improve much as a shooter at this point.
I've been pointing out since his draft night that his finishing rate in college was due in large part to him overpowering 6-1 170 lb point guards in the Big-12 and that his lack of explosive lift in traffic would be an issue against NBA athletes. This is an area I expect him to struggle MORE with as he ages rather than improve upon.
I’d like to begin by saying that i love Smart.
Declining an uncontested shot early in the clock runs the risk of becoming a very low percentage shot as the clock winds down. Especially with 2nd unit players who aren't as skilled as the first string. If you're open and square to the basket, shoot the ball
This. Another consideration is that with Semi and Baynes and Rozier in the lineup against the opponent's second unit, there's at least a chance of getting an offensive rebound on a miss. Two of Smart's 6 misses against the Magic did result in offensive rebounds for the C's. If Smart feels that Baynes and Semi are in position to get a rebound, and if the defense is giving him the open shot, taking the shot is not always the worst option if noone else appears to be in position to make a play on offense.
Two very different philosophies on this. I subscribe to your point of view - don't turn down a good look just because it's early in a possession, in the (possible vain) hope that you'll get a better one.
This is definitely true, except when the player declining said uncontested shot is a 26% 3P shooter.
The second unit has been crap offensively this year. Rozier starting to shoot the ball (finally) probably relieves a little of that. Add in the chemistry issues with all the rookies and you have a recipe for struggles.
I agree. And like I said, I generally subscribe to the first school of thought. If you get a good look early in the shot clock, unless you're milking the clock with a lead, I say... take it. Odds are higher that you'll not get as good a look later in the possession than that you'll get a better one. If a team consistently takes GOOD shots, it will generally do very well.
The issue isn't Tatum throwing up a contested late shot; it's one of Semi, Theiss, Baynes, or Yabusele or Larkin throwing up a hurried and contested shot. Assuming that their success rate in such circumstances is less than 40%, then the Marcus uncontested 3-point attempt has better chance of success.
Because all we remember are the big shots that Rozier, Larkin, et al have hit this year I don't think people really understand just how terrible the second unit has been shooting wise. People should be terrified of a Smartless second unit backcourt next year featuring Rozier/Larkin/Random draftee in the 25-60 range.
Yes. I don't think we'll see that next year, though. If Smart goes I would imagine they will bring in a veteran PG from somewhere.
I don't think he's going at all as he's hitting RFA status in about the worst year possible. The UFA options for a backup should also terrify people.
As said upthread, the issue is that with Smart playing with a bunch of non-playmakers and Rozier (who generally can only create shots for himself and doesn't create a ton for others), if Smart passes up a decent shot, there is no guarantee that working the shot clock will result in better shots.
I want to respond to this purely theoretically, because it doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Firstly, to get all Belichik about it, the goal for any unit should be to help you win the game. This goes without saying and we can all agree with it. But right away this poses a problem for you because, depending on the context, it may be the case that the best use of the 2nd unit towards the goal of winning the game (Herm Edwards) has nothing to do with the three goals you have listed. Even granting this,
The flipside is that GH will be back, Tatum will (almost certainly) be better offensively, and you'll likely have more improvement from Jaylen. That gives a lot more options for creating a decent 2nd unit.
This all scans for me except it leaves me with a question:
It's funny you mention this. I've been wondering about what Drew Cannon has been up to and there's basically nothing out there since he was hired by Stevens five days after he accepted the Celt's HC job. I'd like to know what his data says about Smart.
Yes, that's the big hope, that next year either Morris or Tatum will be on the second unit and that they produce better scoring options as a result. It would also be huge if the LA pick conveys this year as that would be a big boost to the second unit offense.
Let's just run with simple numbers, using this as the second unit: Rozier, Smart, Ojeleye, Theis, Baynes.
Agree. If Smart doesn't improve drastically (and I expect some improvement but not drastic), I don't see who steps up to shower him with cash.
Smart passing up an open three could mean a better shot, but it could also mean a turnover, a contested three (perhaps even by Smart) or a shot clock violation.
Right. I mean, if there's 6 seconds on the shot clock and Smart has an open three, that's a different case than Smart shooting one with 15 seconds on the shot clock. In the first case, the odds of something better coming along aren't that high. But in the second case, the odds are with you.
Well this point is very true.
I believe you’re thinking about this the right way. And I’m pretty sure the C’s brain trust has concluded the break-even point is significantly lower than even most sophisticated fans think it is. My son and I used to joke about installing a V-chip in Avery Bradley’s brain that would shock him every time he took a 3 with more than 5 seconds on the shot clock (back before he started hitting a decent percentage of them), but Stevens obviously wanted him to take those shots.
He actually threw up two of those, I believe—one was just more egregious (and, frankly, funnier—I laughed out loud anyway) than the other.
This is correct. For an offense to function within a flow all players must be able to take shots that come to them within that flow. Making a few every now and again helps too.
Here's the thing though.....an offense can't simply decide who and when these shots will be taken during an offensive set with a 24-second shot clock especially when it is with second-unit (and yes there absolutely is a second unit) players executing. There is a defense on the other side who is going to deny the offenses intended execution while forcing them to do what the defense wants them to do.
We had Smart/Rozier/Ojeleye/Theis on the floor for a 6+ minute stretch of the first half last night which has been common to see combinations such as this all year (with a Baynes, Larkin, etc included in that mix). During this same stretch the Pistons substituted Galloway, Tolliver and Ish Smith for 3 starters while then inserting Kennard and Moreland for the other two starters to begin the 2nd.
The bolded is an assumption that I believe has no merit. What do you base this on?
Yeah, I don't think there's terribly much hope for Marcus as a shooter. The comps people trot out - Chauncey, Artest, Lowry, Kidd - none of them were as bad, or bad for as long - as Marcus has been.
The main difference to me between those other comps is that they each possessed compact, replicable shooting motions. Smart still has his windup which while it isn't quite from his knees in college but is still susceptible to inconsistencies due to the wasted motion.
There are seven to eight teams with cap space this summer. The hazy days of of the summer of '16 are long past, we're into the new normal now. Like most RFAs Marcus is going to be waiting around for a phone call that isn't coming because teams don't make near max offers to sixth men.
Yes, true. And like I've said, if the shot clock is down to like 6 seconds or so, and Smart has an open three pointer...he'd better shoot it. But if he has an open three pointer with 16 seconds on the shot clock, I believe, given his very poor shooting percentage (of course he was great last night), that the best option is to pass up that shot and look for something better.
I base it on the fact that the team is trying to get better shots than Smart hoisting three pointers early in the shot clock. He shoots threes at a horrific percentage. If, truly, Smart shooting a three pointer is your BEST offensive opportunity, then your second unit sucks beyond belief. Late in the shot clock, there's not likely enough time to find a better opportunity. Early in the shot clock? Yeah, you're probably likely to get a better shot.
You're comparing apples and oranges though. It's not relevant how Smart shoots on all threes. It is only relevant how he shoots on open threes early in the shot clock. (All open threes are probably a good enough proxy.) I don't know the answer to that, but it seems probable it is better than his average on all threes. It's quite possible he shoots well enough on those that taking them is either neutral or slightly better than waiting to see if a better shot materializes at the risk of ending up with a worse shot or a turnover.
There is such a fine line though as it is rare when Smart or anyone else is taking a shot with 16 on the clock unless you have a fast break or there was an offensive rebound with the ball already in the frontcourt. Your typical set will have the PG cross halfcourt around 18-19 and begin initiating at 16-17......those shots when Smart is taking a bad shot at 16 is not something that is occurring except during a fast break or off an offensive rebound.
