Player making biggest leap since draft day

[Laimbeer]

Which player in the 2014 draft has made the biggest leap in your evaluation of him since draft day?

[NL41]

Smart turning heads at Team America practices.

Hitting 3s, locking down the best guards in the league, etc.

I think he's going to be as valuable a player as Lillard was his rookie year.

[Tension]

I'd say LaVine, we all knew he had crazy athleticism and a sweet jumper whether it be off the dribble or catch (albeit poor shot selection) but the handles he showed in SL surprised me. I balked at people who said he could develop as a PG, but it's not as farfetched as I had imagined. I still have LaVine pegged as a super athletic Jamal Crawford instant offense 6th man through his career.

[ManualRam]

too early to tell. summer league ball is way different than reg season ball. the talent, style, familiarity and roles are much different.

[165bows]

Didn't see him but read a couple of really positive reviews of UDFA Tyler Johnson that signed in Miami.

[HeartBreakKid]

Off the top of my head, probably Dante Exum. Kinda donned at me that in Utah he'll be playing SG, which I think is ideal for him, and hopefully he'll give up on trying to be a PG for the rest of his career. I do think he can be a very ball dominant-playmaking SG like a Manu.

Back to the topic, I loved Exum's speed and explosiveness in the Summer league. I was a little worried since it had been along time since I seen him play, but it seems like a lot of the things he was good at before translated very well into Summer league play.

[BoutPractice]

I'd say Smart.

I was already high on him, but as someone who's interested in best case scenarios, I think I'd underestimated his ceiling. If he realizes his full potential he's not just a star, he's a superstar, possibly the best guard in the league. He could be a 21st century Walt Frazier. There are always more pessimistic scenarios, of course, including the oft-repeated Rodney Stuckey, the "better offensive Tony Allen"... or middle scenarios like Lance Stephenson.

But I think he strives in the NBA game due to his combination of physical profile and skills, using every advantage from his superior "mass" similar to Harden and LeBron. People have called Harden the LeBron of guards, but Smart could end up fitting that description better, with his stronger defensive effort and more inside oriented game. Or at least the Ron Artest of guards.

He's bigger and stronger than very few guards in the league, can get to the basket with a momentum that's difficult to stop, knows how to pass, a definite + defender who will terrify opposing guards, might end up leading the league in steals, and even showed signs with his shooting. He also has great work ethic, a high degree of self-confidence, and landed in a historically good franchise which although well managed currently lacks star power, a rare combination.

[Johnlac1]

I'd say Smart.

I was already high on him, but as someone who's interested in best case scenarios, I think I'd underestimated his ceiling. If he realizes his full potential he's not just a star, he's a superstar, possibly the best guard in the league. He could be a 21st century Walt Frazier. There are always more pessimistic scenarios, of course, including the oft-repeated Rodney Stuckey, the "better offensive Tony Allen"... or middle scenarios like Lance Stephenson.

But I think he strives in the NBA game due to his combination of physical profile and skills, using every advantage from his superior "mass" similar to Harden and LeBron. People have called Harden the LeBron of guards, but Smart could end up fitting that description better, with his stronger defensive effort and more inside oriented game. Or at least the Ron Artest of guards.

He's bigger and stronger than very few guards in the league, can get to the basket with a momentum that's difficult to stop, knows how to pass, a definite + defender who will terrify opposing guards, might end up leading the league in steals, and even showed signs with his shooting. He also has great work ethic, a high degree of self-confidence, and landed in a historically good franchise which although well managed currently lacks star power, a rare combination.

I'm high on Smart as well. I was not real impressed with him his frosh year at OSU, but he really impressed me last year...even with the problem with the fan. What I find amusing is some people on this board saying he lacks athleticism. He's got an excellent combination of strength, speed, quickness, and leaping ability. His desire is exceptional. He has to work on his jumper but he's a good passer and decent ballhandler. He wants to get better. Those sorts of players usually do very well.

[ManualRam]

I'd say Smart.

I was already high on him, but as someone who's interested in best case scenarios, I think I'd underestimated his ceiling. If he realizes his full potential he's not just a star, he's a superstar, possibly the best guard in the league. He could be a 21st century Walt Frazier. There are always more pessimistic scenarios, of course, including the oft-repeated Rodney Stuckey, the "better offensive Tony Allen"... or middle scenarios like Lance Stephenson.

But I think he strives in the NBA game due to his combination of physical profile and skills, using every advantage from his superior "mass" similar to Harden and LeBron. People have called Harden the LeBron of guards, but Smart could end up fitting that description better, with his stronger defensive effort and more inside oriented game. Or at least the Ron Artest of guards.

He's bigger and stronger than very few guards in the league, can get to the basket with a momentum that's difficult to stop, knows how to pass, a definite + defender who will terrify opposing guards, might end up leading the league in steals, and even showed signs with his shooting. He also has great work ethic, a high degree of self-confidence, and landed in a historically good franchise which although well managed currently lacks star power, a rare combination.

I'm high on Smart as well. I was not real impressed with him his frosh year at OSU, but he really impressed me last year...even with the problem with the fan. What I find amusing is some people on this board saying he lacks athleticism. He's got an excellent combination of strength, speed, quickness, and leaping ability. His desire is exceptional. He has to work on his jumper but he's a good passer and decent ballhandler. He wants to get better. Those sorts of players usually do very well.

neither his speed, quickness nor leaping ability are impressive. how was he much more impressive this yr compared to his freshman yr? was there some great improvement in his game that i missed?

[Johnlac1]

I'd say Smart.

I was already high on him, but as someone who's interested in best case scenarios, I think I'd underestimated his ceiling. If he realizes his full potential he's not just a star, he's a superstar, possibly the best guard in the league. He could be a 21st century Walt Frazier. There are always more pessimistic scenarios, of course, including the oft-repeated Rodney Stuckey, the "better offensive Tony Allen"... or middle scenarios like Lance Stephenson.

But I think he strives in the NBA game due to his combination of physical profile and skills, using every advantage from his superior "mass" similar to Harden and LeBron. People have called Harden the LeBron of guards, but Smart could end up fitting that description better, with his stronger defensive effort and more inside oriented game. Or at least the Ron Artest of guards.

He's bigger and stronger than very few guards in the league, can get to the basket with a momentum that's difficult to stop, knows how to pass, a definite + defender who will terrify opposing guards, might end up leading the league in steals, and even showed signs with his shooting. He also has great work ethic, a high degree of self-confidence, and landed in a historically good franchise which although well managed currently lacks star power, a rare combination.

I'm high on Smart as well. I was not real impressed with him his frosh year at OSU, but he really impressed me last year...even with the problem with the fan. What I find amusing is some people on this board saying he lacks athleticism. He's got an excellent combination of strength, speed, quickness, and leaping ability. His desire is exceptional. He has to work on his jumper but he's a good passer and decent ballhandler. He wants to get better. Those sorts of players usually do very well.

neither his speed, quickness nor leaping ability are impressive. how was he much more impressive this yr compared to his freshman yr? was there some great improvement in his game that i missed?

You must be watching a different Marcus Smart. If you watched Smart play last year you would have seen him block a number of shots and also be on the scoring end of some lob dunks.

[NL41]

Smart cut down his turnovers a great deal last year.

I think there's a case that Smart was one of the most athletic players in this year's draft, when you factor in strength and agility times.

Sure, Smart can't jump as high as LaVine and Wiggins, but LaVine weighs like 181 pounds, and Smart weighs 227. That's a 46 pound difference.

LaVine had a better agility time, but Smart was also top 5. LaVine had a slightly better sprint time, but they were relatively close.

@ESPNStatsInfo
Follow

Marcus Smart's lane agility time of 10.82 is faster than John Wall (10.84), Russell Westbrook (10.98) and Chris Paul (11.09)

Smart's leaping ability might not seem great, but only when you compare him to guys that weigh 20-50 pounds less. Same for his speed and quickness.

Smart bench pressed 185 pounds 19 times. That means he could bench press Zach LaVine's body weight 20+ times, tied for third in the whole combine. Not bad for a point guard. If that's not athletic I don't know what is.

Blake Griffin only did 3 more bench reps than Smart.

Smart might not be the flashiest athlete, but his in-game athleticism is elite for this draft class and for the League, because strength is so much more important than vertical leap in games.

I think it's going to be like Damien Lillard's rookie year as far as immediate impact that everybody should have seen coming. He won't shoot as well as Lillard, but he'll do almost everything else as good, and his defense will be way better.

[ManualRam]

nah i wouldn't consider his athleticism elite at all, even just comparing him to his class. wiggins, gordon, markel brown, lavine. those guys are elite athletes for this class, not smart. smart's athleticism is more similar to lance stephenson or tyreke's, except they're better at creating that initial advantage off the bounce with their better handle and deception. he's definitely a downhill, head of steam player. he's not athletic in bursts. he doesn't straight blow by defenders in the halfcourt and he relies more so on his strength and length to finish. i thought he struggled mightily to even turn the corner in summer league.

[NL41]

he doesn't straight blow by defenders in the halfcourt and he relies more so on his strength and length to finish.

Like I said, strength should be as important as any other factor when talking about athleticism. Strength plays as big a role as any other physical attribute on the basketball court.

And we tend to compare Smart's athleticism to other point guards and shooting guards, instead of comparing him to other 225-230 pound guys.

Smart's strength at 6'3 is every bit as freakish as Wiggins or LaVine's vertical leaping. Smart might only rate a 7 or 8 out of 10 in vertical leap, but he rates a 10/10 in strength for height, while Wiggins and LaVine rate about 2 or 3 out of 10 for strength for height.

The decathlon is considered the best sport to measure all around athleticism, strength included. The decathlon gold medalist is often called "The world's best all-around athlete".

The guy who wins the high jump and the 100 meters usually doesn't win if he's only shot putting 8 feet and throwing the javelin 20 feet. Nothing athletic about being a weakling who gets pushed around by every other athlete/player, and goes flying at the slightest contact.

Smart is going to get to the free throw line at an absolutely elite rate. When he meets Embiid and others in the air, his body doesn't get pushed back.

Smart can guard at least 3 positions, and he isn't a disaster when he bodies up power forwards in a pinch. LaVine can't even body up shooting guards, and Wiggins is going to get thrashed if Minny tries to play him extended minutes at small forward.

You guys can keep your limited definition of athleticism.

I'll take the athleticism that actually translates best to the game of basketball.

[ManualRam]

i'll take in-game, translatable athleticism too.
strength is beneficial on drives to maintain advantages, not create them. smart neither has the quickness nor the shiftiness (handle) to create the initial advantage. it'll help him play through contact at the rim, but he has to get there first.

[NL41]

With his 10/10 strength for his height, and the elite leverage that goes with it, he only needs the slightest space/advantage to get by defenders. He doesn't need the space Wiggins and LaVine need, and you're selling short his ability to get to the rim just about at will.

But funtionally, his 10/10 strength helps him in a bunch of other ways. Posting up other guards who weigh 20/50 lbs less, or even holding his own posting up small forwards.

Boxing out is another area, especially with his elite leverage. At 6'2, he'll be able to box out 240lb+ guys, even if he doesn't end up getting the rebound.

Contesting shots at the rim takes shoulder strength, which Smart has in abundance. Watch this great block by Avery Bradley, which left his weaker shoulder injured and eventually ended his season:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34gviEcQCOA

Smart can handle that force to his shoulders much easier, even against power forwards.

Then there's things like setting picks and screens. Smart can set a much sturdier and more effective pick/screen than somebody like Wiggins or LaVine, even against power forwards with his elite leverage advantage.

There are a bunch of areas where strength is a big factor in basketball.

When LaVine and Wiggins fill out, they will be better functional athletes than they are now, even if they lose an inch or 3 on their verts.

[ManualRam]

it doesn't work that way. strength isn't used to get by defenders. quickness, momentum and/or shiftiness does.
strength on drives is used to maintain an advantage gained. smart's initial thrust is the issue and is why he struggles to blow by defenders and turn the corner. then his elevation in traffic is nothing special either.
it's easier to get stronger than it is to get quicker and shiftier.

[NL41]

it doesn't work that way. strength isn't used to get by defenders. quickness, momentum and/or shiftiness does.
strength on drives is used to maintain an advantage gained. smart's initial thrust is the issue and is why he struggles to blow by defenders and turn the corner. then his elevation in traffic is nothing special either.
it's easier to get stronger than it is to get quicker and shiftier.

Smart doesn't blow by defenders, and he doesn't always make a straight line to the hoop, but he gets there nonetheless, and gets to the line at an elite rate.

With strength, you don't need to drive in a straight line to the hoop. Strong guys can start driving at an angle, in the general direction of the hoop. Once you get a shoulder next to the guy, you can start curving toward the hoop, using about as much contact as you want to push the guy out of your path, even if you never blow past him and he comes along for the ride on your shoulder.

Wiggins and LaVine aren't going to be driving on guys like this, because the don't have the strength and leverage. They're not going to get to the line as much either, since even when they do blow by their man in isolation, they'll shrink from the hard fouls of the big boys and either put up a long floater or otherwise avoid getting hammered on.

[NL41]

And I don't think Lance Stephenson is a spot-on comparison for Smart, because Lance can't shut down point guards like Smart can. Smart's lateral quickness is pretty much elite, for a 180 pounder or 227 pounder.

Smart is also a bit more explosive than Lance, both in first step and in jumping.

I really think that Smart could be about as good as Lance by the end of this rookie year, and if Lance didn't have the toxic attitude, he would have made close to max this summer.

[NL41]

Lance Stephenson's standing vert at his combine was 27". Marcus Smart's standing vert was 33" at the same weight. Max verts were 36 for Smart and 33 for Lance.

And Lance's agility time was 11:39, while Smart's was 10:89.

[atlantabbq99]

McBuckets..... the dude went from the next Korver and now people are saying he is the next Peja or Dirk