The outspoken analyst’s comments, made during a recent episode of First Take, have drawn strong reactions from fans, pundits, and even Giannis Antetokounmpo himself, highlighting the ongoing debate over how greatness is defined in today’s NBA.

The case for “underachiever”

Smith’s critique comes despite Antetokounmpo’s remarkable individual achievements. Over the past four seasons, Giannis has averaged 30.4 points and 11.7 rebounds per game, ranking among the league’s elite in both categories.

He is a nine-time All-Star, nine-time All-NBA selection, and has finished in the top ten for MVP voting nine times. Yet, Smith points to a glaring gap between these accolades and postseason results. Since winning the 2021 NBA title, the Bucks have failed to win a playoff series, most recently falling to the Indiana Pacers in the first round for the second straight year.

On First Take, Smith stated, “You don’t look at somebody that dominant, that fantastic, with that kind of fire in his belly to compete, on a night-in, night-out basis, and all you have is one championship to show for it... That’s unacceptable.”

Smith clarified that he does not blame Giannis personally or question his effort, but believes that a player of his caliber should have more team success to show for his dominance.

Legacy beyond rings

The “underachiever” label has sparked strong pushback from supporters of Antetokounmpo, who point to his journey from humble beginnings in Greece to NBA superstardom as proof that he’s already exceeded expectations.

In response to Smith’s comments, Giannis reposted a fan’s message on social media: “Giannis went from selling sunglasses on a beach in Greece to a multi-millionaire who won a championship without having to run to a superteam. He has over-achieved his wildest dreams and anyone who thinks otherwise is ridiculous.”

The debate also touches on the broader question of how NBA greatness is measured. Critics of Smith’s stance argue that focusing solely on rings overlooks the context of injuries, roster changes, and the competitive nature of the league.

The paradox of greatness

Smith’s comments have reignited the classic NBA paradox: can a player be both historically great and considered an underachiever if team success doesn’t match individual brilliance?

For Giannis, the numbers remain staggering—he averaged 30.4 points, 11.9 rebounds, and 6.5 assists this past season, finishing third in MVP voting. Yet, the Bucks’ playoff struggles have left some questioning whether his prime years are being fully capitalized.

As the new NBA season approaches, the spotlight will remain on Antetokounmpo and the Bucks. Whether or not he adds another championship to his résumé, the debate over his legacy—and what it means to truly “achieve” in the NBA—shows no signs of slowing down.