Marcus Smart is nothing special...why are yall so delusional?

[GuyClinch]

Offense is more then 50% of the game for a PG - its usually less then 50% for a center/PF. Smart really needs to get his offense into gear if he wants to be a perennial all-star/HOF kinda guy. That's the bottom line.

The big issue is that MOST super athletic men - with some training and desire could play NBA defense. You could take McCourty from the Pats off the street - give him like a few months of coaching and he could guard some PG's in the NBA. He would be considerably less useful on the offensive side of the court..

Now most men aren't super athletic and 21 years old. But there are enough of them such that the position demands more. If Smart was 7 foot tall elite defensive center - we wouldn't need to worry about his offense that much. But he isn't - and we do.

[tlee324]

You guys have seen what Stevens has done with guys like Jordan Crawford... and now we're seeing some good things working with Evans, and especially Avery Bradley, who was showing F-level guard skills...

I have a LOT of confidence in Stevens working with Smart over the next few seasons in developing his game.

[pfm]

It's funny that this was created as a sort of "Payton > Smart" thread, because many of the more common advanced metrics disagree, despite Payton playing nearly 50% more minutes than Smart (if you assume that leads to increased development).

Offensive Rating
Smart - 100
Payton - 94

Defensive Rating
Smart - 105
Payton - 107

Offensive Win Shares
Smart - 0.4
Payton - -0.8

Defensive Win Shares
Smart - 1.5
Payton - 1.6

Win Shares per 48
Smart - .067
Payton - .021

Total Win Shares
Smart - 1.9
Payton - 0.8

Off. Box Plus Minus
Smart - -0.2
Payton - -2.2

Def. Box Plus Minus
Smart - 0.8
Payton - 0.4

Total Box Plus Minus
Smart - 0.5
Payton - -1.8

Value Over Replacement Player (VORP)
Smart - 0.9
Payton - 0.1

Now obviously all metrics have flaws, but the consensus is there. Basically you can't just say "look this guy averages more points and assists!". There's a lot more to it than that, but unfortunately volume seems to be the primary factor when people look at rookies and their perceived success (see MCW). And that's not a knock on Payton, both he and Smart are nice young players, though both flawed offensively at the moment (Payton more so than Smart).

To Payton's benefit, he's been able to produce in more volume and with a bigger offensive role than Smart, which does hold some value, however most of the numbers feel that Smart is a more impactful player when on the floor. For Smart, having played about 600 total minutes less than Smart (about 20 full games worth), these numbers are impressive considering the rookie learning curve and in the fact that he still outproduces Payton in cumulative stats such as total win shares.

[SmartWentCrazy]

Wednesday vs Westbrook will be a real measuring stick for Smart's defensive potential. Westbrook has been an unstoppable force the past month and a half, hoping Smart is up to the challenge.

[Fidel Sarcasmo]

brandley and Smart are going to probalby have a lot of fouls called on them for whatever reason. Either Westbrook actually deserves to go to the line or the refs are just whistle happy when it comes to westbrook. He goes to the line a ton per game. All it takes is a two game losing streak and we get brought back down from our nice perch we've created. i'm enjoying the ride while it lasts. Hopefully, the magic can continue and we can be in the game with a chance to win it at the end of the game

[humblebum]

Many are calling him the next Chauncey Billups or Gary Payton - I'm just offering another perspective.

And 1300+ minutes isn't a ton, but we're closing in on a full season of data. Nor is he on an upward trajectory. He's been Phil Pressey awful offensively for almost two months now after losing his 3-point touch. In 22 games as a starter (31mpg), he's putting up 9/5/3 on 33/27/62 shooting.

Honestly all good points. His shooting has been pretty bad overall inside the arc. I actually find his overall 3PT percentage to be pretty respectable for a guard who wasn't supposed to be able to shoot. I think that's a nice takeaway for his offensive game. As for the other parts of his offensive game, I am a bit disappointed, BUT from the eye test he has been taking it into the lane a lot more the last couple months. I see some potential there only because it's a big difference from even summer league. He has the will to improve so I like that. I thought he may struggle to finish at the rim in his rookie year while he was still figuring it out, but I had hoped he would have had more reps there by now.

Anyway, only thing I want to really disagree with you on is that he hasn't been drawing fouls. He actually has been doing that pretty well considering his shooting spread. 40% of his shots are inside the arc, yet he still has a 27% FTr overall, which is actually really impressive considering the limited amount of shots he takes inside the arc.

I don't think FTr is much too get excited about in Smart's case. Phil Pressey has a 27% FTr too. They are both physical guards who are not afraid of hitting the floor to get some free throws on the rare occasions they are enough of a threat to force the foul.

The excitement with Smart is all about the W-L column, his youth and his college track record. And I guess his A:TO ratio. Everything else at this point screams weak offensive player.

Eh, I don't think, again that there is enough of a sample size for anything to be at the level of "screaming." It's natural and perfectly fine for people to question Smart's offensive potential or wonder if he'll ever develop the skills needed to get into the paint consistently despite his lack of a great first step. But we are just so far from the point in time, MP, etc. where anything truly definitive can be stated.

Smart is a team first guy, and in that vein, the dude has straight balled out defensively. If you come into a situation where there is someone ahead of you (Rondo) and there is a guy (Turner) who the coach is experimenting with as a primary ballhandler/playmaker, the true team first guy will ask himself how best to help the team and focus his efforts on the areas of the game to complement those guys (defending, catching and shooting, moving the ball) and in those areas he's been stellar.

What gives me a lot of confidence in Smart's offense is that you can clearly build onto the base he already possesses. He's a willing catch and shoot player, who despite not being a great three point shooter, is a guy who will take and make important three point shots with regularity. Which means he, unlike Rondo or Elfrid, will have the opportunity to learn how to drive close outs. He's also a guy who sees the entire floor and he knows how to pick a pass. So playing in a ball movement system, Smart is already a "functional" player in that he can screen, shoot, dribble, and pass the ball. Driving close outs and being a ball mover (added onto being a decent shooter and a guy with some clutch gene) would be a big improvement for year 2.

But beyond that, Smart is a guy who can get to the basket in transition and in PnR. And I think he's really avoided exploring these areas of his game because he was nervous (early on), he was stuck behind two vet ball handlers (Rondo/Turner) or simply playing in a competitive situation (during this time of him starting and the team turning things around) where he's again too team oriented to subject his teammates to a "growing pains" type of development curve.

Now, after an offseason and a training camp, if Smart is the same guy I think we will be getting much closer to the point where these whispers of offensive weakness might turn into a shout, but even then the kid is only 22? I mean, if we are assuming he can't get into the paint due to a lack of explosiveness, or a lack of an elite handle, then maybe patience is best practiced in regards to projecting his potential as the skills he'll need to develop to overcome that lack of explosiveness are the highest level skills and the most difficult skills to obtain in the game of basketball. Which are poise, learning to play angles, use your body, change of speeds, how to set up defenders to make them stick to picks, etc.

Frankly, I think Smart has the tools to be a very good, but never a great offensive player. And most of them are inside his head. He just needs to be patient with himself and maintain his confidence. It won't happen overnight, and it usually takes PG's years to develop. It's just that guys like Westbrook came into situations where they could make a ton of mistakes and still be praised for the flashes of brilliance. Smart has had to accept a lesser role and play within that... and funny enough the criticisms that Westbrook still gets and the questions that surrounded Smart coming out of college were whether or not he could become more efficient and play within a more narrowly defined offensive role.

[soxfan2003]

Yeah, I'm with arambone... Smart is just vastly underrated. I don't think the "Fisher" type tag much of a knock as I really respect what Fish was as a player in this league, someone who Shaq referred to as the "anchor" of the defense on those Laker championship teams. So in that sense, yeah... I think Smart has a similar level of intangibles and natural leadership.

But Fish is a knockdown shooter and I think Smart doesn't have as much natural shooting touch. But I also think that Smart just has so much more potential offensively in terms of getting to the basket and passing the ball. It's just that he does it in such a different fashion than Rondo that I think people have a tough time understanding the value of "moving the ball" rather than being this ultra "playmaker". When you play a 5 man game offensively it's much more important to keep the rock moving and letting everyone get a touch than it is to be THE guy to break down the defense consistently and create easy looks for teammates.

Over time I believe Smart will prove a lot of people wrong about his dribble drive/kick/playmaking abilities in much the same way that Bradley has made a ton of people look like complete idiots. Is anyone still saying that Bradley isn't improving as a ball handler, shot creator, passer?

In a season or two I think people will be eating a lot of words about Smart.

Here are the PER numbers on Bradley. I don't think PER is good at comparing Zeller to Bradley giving the drastically different roles and even positions but it is a pretty good stat for comparing Avery Bradley to Avery Bradley.
PER 2.2 rookie season
PER 11.3
PER 8.8
PER 12.7
PER 11.2 this season.

If you look at Bradley's points/assists/turnovers the last couple of years, there really hasn't been that much improvement. It is easier to just feel good about the Celtics players when they are winning.

I am not anti Bradley at all -- I have defended him as not being as bad as his PPS numbers indicated since TS% is much more fair way to judge his shooting/scoring -- but just don't think he has made significant improvement as a basketball player since last year. He is getting to the line less and not shooting 3's as well. Add it all up and he is about the same. The difference is the other players on the Celtics are playing better and the team is actually trying to win games late in the season.

I see Smart if he reaches his peak as Fisher on a massive amount of steroids. Despite being older than Smart, Fisher didn't shoot that well from the line or from 3 as a rookie. Before last years NBA draft, I thought Smart should develop into somewhere between a lower tier all-star and the 50th best player in the game. I see no reason as of right now to change that opinion. Next year will be key for him.

[humblebum]

Yeah, I'm with arambone... Smart is just vastly underrated. I don't think the "Fisher" type tag much of a knock as I really respect what Fish was as a player in this league, someone who Shaq referred to as the "anchor" of the defense on those Laker championship teams. So in that sense, yeah... I think Smart has a similar level of intangibles and natural leadership.

But Fish is a knockdown shooter and I think Smart doesn't have as much natural shooting touch. But I also think that Smart just has so much more potential offensively in terms of getting to the basket and passing the ball. It's just that he does it in such a different fashion than Rondo that I think people have a tough time understanding the value of "moving the ball" rather than being this ultra "playmaker". When you play a 5 man game offensively it's much more important to keep the rock moving and letting everyone get a touch than it is to be THE guy to break down the defense consistently and create easy looks for teammates.

Over time I believe Smart will prove a lot of people wrong about his dribble drive/kick/playmaking abilities in much the same way that Bradley has made a ton of people look like complete idiots. Is anyone still saying that Bradley isn't improving as a ball handler, shot creator, passer?

In a season or two I think people will be eating a lot of words about Smart.

Here are the PER numbers on Bradley. I don't think PER is good at comparing Zeller to Bradley giving the drastically different roles and even positions but it is a pretty good stat for comparing Avery Bradley to Avery Bradley.
PER 2.2 rookie season
PER 11.3
PER 8.8
PER 12.7
PER 11.2 this season.

If you look at Bradley's points/assists/turnovers the last couple of years, there really hasn't been that much improvement. It is easier to just feel good about the Celtics players when they are winning.

I am not anti Bradley at all -- I have defended him as not being as bad as his PPS numbers indicated since TS% is much more fair way to judge his shooting/scoring -- but just don't think he has made significant improvement as a basketball player since last year. He is getting to the line less and not shooting 3's as well. Add it all up and he is about the same. The difference is the other players on the Celtics are playing better and the team is actually trying to win games late in the season.

I see Smart if he reaches his peak as Fisher on a massive amount of steroids. Despite being older than Smart, Fisher didn't shoot that well from the line or from 3 as a rookie. Before last years NBA draft, I thought Smart should develop into somewhere between a lower tier all-star and the 50th best player in the game. I see no reason as of right now to change that opinion. Next year will be key for him.

Yeah, well, I don't think I can really say how much of a waste of time stats like PER are.

I'm a guy who watches games and not box scores and if we have to look at PER before actually discussing what's happening on the court I don't really know where to take the discussion. Bradley is a guy who's game is clearly progressing in a host of areas but who's simultaneously being asked to dramatically increase his level of responsibilities in parallel with that growth.

If his role on the team remained static, and his advanced metrics were plateauing, that would be a lot more useful of a tool. But if a player is improving while having to take on much higher difficulty of role/responsibility these type of year to year comparisons are silly.

The thing also to look at with Bradley is that he's a "move your feet" type of defender and not one of these "roamers" like Smart who live off savvy, intelligence, and the ability to turn the opponent over, get loose balls etc. Bradley is a dynamic athlete of a defender. He's the corner back who can run with anybody, defend in all types of matchups and areas of the court, but not the type to come up with the clutch interception. So in that regard Avery's defense doesn't translate into measurable statistics as easily as a Marcus Smart.

And offensively, he's a guy who can shot very well from certain areas and in certain situations, but when asked to extrapolate the production into broader areas of late shot clock shot creation, primary utilization within the offense, etc. his efficiency will naturally take substantive hits as he's not a guy who gets back those "efficiency" points at the FT line or beyond the arc (outside of "below the break three point shooting").

[Gomes3PC]

I'd just caution guys to step back and realize that Marcus Smart is not going to make our break our future either way. Yes, as a high pick you want to nail that selection with a quality player and ideally a core starter for the future contender we are building, but we have made great strides this year otherwise. We know now we have a great coach, we cleared cap space, we added assets like Zeller, Crowder and Thomas, and we have a team playing unified, high-quality basketball.

Progress. That is the name of the game. We have dug ourselves out of the deepest part of the hole and have made ourselves an attractive destination for free agents and trade candidates to improve their trade value. We have lots of cap space, a well-respected coach and a top-5 GM. This season has gone about as well as we all could've possibly hoped, especially in the context of knowing we traded two quality players in Rondo/Green and saw injuries to young core pieces (KO, Smart and Sullinger).

[BannersOnly]

The best two things about Smart is his body and attitude. He has a man's body and plays hard without sulking. Conversely, those are the two worst things about Sully. The guy is a fat slob and he sulks and pouts far too much on the court for my likeing. I've never been sold on Smart being anything more than just a solid combo guard off the bench and I still think that's where he'll end up being when he really hits his prime years of his career. Not bad and not a "bust" but certainly nowhere near the star or above average starter that some fans on this board seem to think he will be. He's basically the guard version of Crowder. Tough, gritty player that will play hard every night but never be anything special. It is what it is.

[pfm]

The best two things about Smart is his body and attitude. He has a man's body and plays hard without sulking. Conversely, those are the two worst things about Sully. The guy is a fat slob and he sulks and pouts far too much on the court for my likeing. I've never been sold on Smart being anything more than just a solid combo guard off the bench and I still think that's where he'll end up being when he really hits his prime years of his career. Not bad and not a "bust" but certainly nowhere near the star or above average starter that some fans on this board seem to think he will be. He's basically the guard version of Crowder. Tough, gritty player that will play hard every night but never be anything special. It is what it is.

Smart is already "a solid combo guard off the bench" 52 games into his career, even if just as a defensive specialist. It's one thing to say he won't ever be a star and another to say that he'll be an average NBA player who shows no progression from his rookie season. But hey, it is what it is.

[KGboss]

The best two things about Smart is his body and attitude. He has a man's body and plays hard without sulking. Conversely, those are the two worst things about Sully. The guy is a fat slob and he sulks and pouts far too much on the court for my likeing. I've never been sold on Smart being anything more than just a solid combo guard off the bench and I still think that's where he'll end up being when he really hits his prime years of his career. Not bad and not a "bust" but certainly nowhere near the star or above average starter that some fans on this board seem to think he will be. He's basically the guard version of Crowder. Tough, gritty player that will play hard every night but never be anything special. It is what it is.

Smart is already "a solid combo guard off the bench" 52 games into his career, even if just as a defensive specialist. It's one thing to say he won't ever be a star and another to say that he'll be an average NBA player who shows no progression from his rookie season. But hey, it is what it is.

Banners doesnt like that Smart is a positive and therefore his tanking wishes have gone completely off the tracks.

Just a slight observation with speculated facts supporting it.

[soxfan2003]

Yeah, I'm with arambone... Smart is just vastly underrated. I don't think the "Fisher" type tag much of a knock as I really respect what Fish was as a player in this league, someone who Shaq referred to as the "anchor" of the defense on those Laker championship teams. So in that sense, yeah... I think Smart has a similar level of intangibles and natural leadership.

But Fish is a knockdown shooter and I think Smart doesn't have as much natural shooting touch. But I also think that Smart just has so much more potential offensively in terms of getting to the basket and passing the ball. It's just that he does it in such a different fashion than Rondo that I think people have a tough time understanding the value of "moving the ball" rather than being this ultra "playmaker". When you play a 5 man game offensively it's much more important to keep the rock moving and letting everyone get a touch than it is to be THE guy to break down the defense consistently and create easy looks for teammates.

Over time I believe Smart will prove a lot of people wrong about his dribble drive/kick/playmaking abilities in much the same way that Bradley has made a ton of people look like complete idiots. Is anyone still saying that Bradley isn't improving as a ball handler, shot creator, passer?

In a season or two I think people will be eating a lot of words about Smart.

Here are the PER numbers on Bradley. I don't think PER is good at comparing Zeller to Bradley giving the drastically different roles and even positions but it is a pretty good stat for comparing Avery Bradley to Avery Bradley.
PER 2.2 rookie season
PER 11.3
PER 8.8
PER 12.7
PER 11.2 this season.

If you look at Bradley's points/assists/turnovers the last couple of years, there really hasn't been that much improvement. It is easier to just feel good about the Celtics players when they are winning.

I am not anti Bradley at all -- I have defended him as not being as bad as his PPS numbers indicated since TS% is much more fair way to judge his shooting/scoring -- but just don't think he has made significant improvement as a basketball player since last year. He is getting to the line less and not shooting 3's as well. Add it all up and he is about the same. The difference is the other players on the Celtics are playing better and the team is actually trying to win games late in the season.

I see Smart if he reaches his peak as Fisher on a massive amount of steroids. Despite being older than Smart, Fisher didn't shoot that well from the line or from 3 as a rookie. Before last years NBA draft, I thought Smart should develop into somewhere between a lower tier all-star and the 50th best player in the game. I see no reason as of right now to change that opinion. Next year will be key for him.

Yeah, well, I don't think I can really say how much of a waste of time stats like PER are.

I'm a guy who watches games and not box scores and if we have to look at PER before actually discussing what's happening on the court I don't really know where to take the discussion. Bradley is a guy who's game is clearly progressing in a host of areas but who's simultaneously being asked to dramatically increase his level of responsibilities in parallel with that growth.

If his role on the team remained static, and his advanced metrics were plateauing, that would be a lot more useful of a tool. But if a player is improving while having to take on much higher difficulty of role/responsibility these type of year to year comparisons are silly.

The thing also to look at with Bradley is that he's a "move your feet" type of defender and not one of these "roamers" like Smart who live off savvy, intelligence, and the ability to turn the opponent over, get loose balls etc. Bradley is a dynamic athlete of a defender. He's the corner back who can run with anybody, defend in all types of matchups and areas of the court, but not the type to come up with the clutch interception. So in that regard Avery's defense doesn't translate into measurable statistics as easily as a Marcus Smart.

And offensively, he's a guy who can shot very well from certain areas and in certain situations, but when asked to extrapolate the production into broader areas of late shot clock shot creation, primary utilization within the offense, etc. his efficiency will naturally take substantive hits as he's not a guy who gets back those "efficiency" points at the FT line or beyond the arc (outside of "below the break three point shooting").

)
I have been watching most of the games and I actually don't see an overall increased in responsibilities with Bradley this year compared to last year. Compared to his first couple of years? Sure. But since last year, his actual usage is down. Averaged 14.9 points last year and 14 this year.

You mentioned "advanced metrics". Among the stat heads, Real Plus Minus (RPM)and stats like it are perhaps the most widely respected. OK lets look at Bradley's Real Plus Minus (RPM) stat the past two years. To be fair, I like this stat more over a longer period of time.

last season 1.98 -- > pretty good.
this season .43 --> not bad as well but not as good as last year.

http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/rpm/_ ... position/1

I suspect his best year with this metric or its "predecessors" like RAPM was in 2011-12.... He was doing so well during parts of that season I suspect with advanced stats or just normal +- being a driver that Rivers benched Ray Allen for Bradley.

As for PER. I think it is unfair to compare Allen Iverson and Bradley with PER but comparing Bradley to Bradley over the last two seasons substantiates a lot when his usage hasn't changed much. He has been evolving his game to rely more upon the 3 -- a good thing -- but his effectiveness hasn't improved from last year and his role is not dramatically different compared to last year.

NBA players usually don't improve that much from 23 to 24 or 24 to 25. Some do, others get worse. On average they stay about the same. Barring injury, I suspect Bradley won't get much better or much worse during the remaining 3 years of his contract.

Before thinking I am "bashing" Bradley. I think he is a good regular season player but just a player that hasn't shown much "upside". Given his struggles against the Knicks, I am somewhat concerned about how his game translates into the playoffs and I am left wondering if Ainge truly paid a "market rate" for Bradley since Boston didn't appear to get an "injury risk" discount. Nevertheless, other than having wanted his contract to be "front loaded" like IT2 instead of an escalating contract, I didn't have a huge issue with his contract. I would much rather have Danny Green over the last few seasons and the next few seasons but I think Bradley is a good player.

Before dismissing the RPM stat, Crowder has a much better RPM rating than Jeff Green. It isn't that Crowder's rating overall for the year is that good, it is Jeff Green's is awful. He is now 78th out of 86 SF's. Crowder is 32 out of 86.

As much as I (IMHO) correctly said Rondo was overrated, Jeff Green was just as overrated. Godmoney was was right on Green. I always knew Jeff Green wasn't very good the past couple of year but I was still overrating him a little bit. Others were overrating him a TON. Some people last year compared Andrew Wiggins to Jeff Green, I laughed at the comparison but I didn't expect Wiggins as a rookie to be performing much better than veteran Green but he really is. Wiggins still has a hell of a lot of improvement to do and was bad at first in the NBA but right now playing this season at just 19-20 years old, he is 29th in RPM among SF's. Jeff Green is 78th. I don't know what the hell Memphis was thinking when they traded for Green. Hollinger knew he was overrated when he ridiculed Ainge for signing him but somehow he changed his mind and justified the Green acquisition/rental with obfuscation. I can't believe someone as sophisticated as Hollinger with stats was the true driving force behind that trade. Memphis needed to do some sort of "go for it" acquisition but they should have gone in a different direction.

Some reasons for the Celtics success this year. While hardly a high upside player, Crowder >> Jeff Green for regular season basketball at least. Toughness/grit count for something. Smart >> post ACL Rondo. Better depth. Zeller an improvement over what the Celtics had. In short stints, players like IT2 and Prince have helped as well.

[soxfan2003]

The best two things about Smart is his body and attitude. He has a man's body and plays hard without sulking. Conversely, those are the two worst things about Sully. The guy is a fat slob and he sulks and pouts far too much on the court for my likeing. I've never been sold on Smart being anything more than just a solid combo guard off the bench and I still think that's where he'll end up being when he really hits his prime years of his career. Not bad and not a "bust" but certainly nowhere near the star or above average starter that some fans on this board seem to think he will be. He's basically the guard version of Crowder. Tough, gritty player that will play hard every night but never be anything special. It is what it is.

As a rookie, Smart is 20th among NBA point guards in the RPM stat. Not farfetched to project him as a future top 5-10 PG. Smart does things like fight through screens like Dick Butkus that just don't show up on the stat sheet. He is a "winning" player. Even if Smart doesn't improve, he deserves to be an NBA starter on a bad team. I think it is probably misguided to project as much future improvement with Smart as players like Wiggins, Exum, Gordon or even Nerlens Noel but Smart right now is better than some starting PGs and and should continue to get better for a couple of years.

If the Celtics are trying to win games, replacing players like Green and post ACL Rondo with Crowder and Smart is a good thing.

Frankly I don't care that much if Smart ever makes an all-star team and it may be to the Celtics advantage if he doesn't. I just hope he develops into a genuine top 25 player.

Kawhi Leonard IMHO is a Top 15 player but he hasn't made a single all-star team. Leonard is 8th in the entire NBA in RPM this year. Spurs were like the early 90's Celtics until Leonard arrived on the seen and gave them a huge shot in the arm.

In the future, Smart may be 85% as good as Leonard but that is still darn good even if he never makes an all-star team.

[John Locke]

Marcus Smart looks like a good prospect.

I was wondering about the user that posted the original post. This is his/her only post.

It means that this person is afraid to post this under his/her own username and wanted to stir up things. I think we all see that Smart looks to become at least a decent starter.

[KGboss]

Smart with a 25-9-5-2 steal-2 blocks game last night playing up against Westbrook.

Party time.

[return2glory]

The game against OKC was the 2nd really good game by Smart all year. The 1st was against the Wizards.

This game was overdue. It was great to see Smart playing really well. I expect more of these games from Marcus next year.

[Stadium5]

Love Smart. So pumped we were able to come out with him at the 6 pick. Would be awesome if we could somehow add a defensive wing to him like Stanley, Butler, or Kawhi

[ddb]

Last night was starting to look like Smart's coming out party, where he out-dueled an MVP candidate in his own barn for a big win, until the refs completely took over the game. As much as I love the NBA, those are the games that make me wonder why I love basketball so much.... It's clear the NBA wants OKC in the playoffs. OKC couldn't afford to lose that game and in the 2nd half the refs absolutely took over. worst officiating I've seen all season long.

On the bright side. Celtics kept pushing. they never give up. I love to see that

[The_Ghost_of_JB]

Smart played well but last night but I am not going to lie: Not crazy about all the three pointers he is taking (12 last night) Those are hit and miss for him and I would like to see more mid range and driving shots.