NoDopeOnSundays wrote:Chanel Bomber wrote:Players do receive their market value, but it is not always reflective of their actual on-court value. As I assess what contract a player should receive, I judge their value based moreso on the latter, which is not to say that they will not receive what their market value dictates.
This is not a reality based argument then, your contract assessments do not reflect what the market actually is, it's more in line with auction fantasy league than reality.
I have no doubts that RJ will receive a contract that pays him north of $20 million a year. The market will drive his value into that territory. But based on his play, I value his current contribution on the court at $10 million. I certainly don't think he is a better player than PJ Tucker, or Royce O'Neale, or Kevin Huerter today. But because he is young and he presumably still has upside, I wouldn't find a bump of $5 million annually to be unreasonable ($15 million total), although I am not confident he would prove to be worth that contract.
Lets be clear, you may need to reevaluate your talent evaluation if you think Huerter, Tucker or O'neale are better players today, that's not even a serious argument to me. What you value his contribution on the court at isn't realistic, because it starts from a place of dislike and wanting to be right about him, even when shown the guys who make $10 million you stick to it.
What you say about RJ "only needing to make 1 more free throw and/or one more lay-up a game" could be said for any player in the league. And then every young player is good because of what they could do and not because of the way they have actually performed over a 3-year span. This is purely fictional, and not realistic. That's not the extent in which players improve anyway - a more realistic yet significant improvement would merely be 0.2 or 0.3 misses turning into makes per game.
You could say that about a lot of players, however not many of them are starting from a point where they averaged 23/6/4, if he averages similar numbers and we see small bumps in efficiency he's well worth the contract. Keep in mind, when he averaged those numbers he did it on only 68 touches per game, it wasn't ball-hogging like some of you try so hard to claim, he was only 3rd on the team in touches, and those numbers with that limited amount of touches is something you definitely want to see. He wasn't hijacking the offense to get his, he was simply being more aggressive when he got it and the offense could still function. This is what you miss when it comes to him, he doesn't have the hallmarks of a ball dominant me first scorer, and just for comparisons sakes when Simons numbers went up his touches per game ballooned to 82 per game, we could see some regression to the mean for Simons this year when he has to share with Lillard.
RJ does not really align with the developmental curve of Jaylen Brown. Maybe if you only look at the raw boxscore numbers, but Brown has scored higher on impact, efficiency, and defense throughout his career, with the exception of his 3rd year, which admittedly aligns with RJ's 3rd year in terms of impact (though not in efficiency).
Come on now man, what?
I never said we should jettison RJ because he doesn't project as a #1 on a contender. My issue is that he doesn't project as a #2 either, and I think it's optimistic to think he could be a #3. I think he should be developed as a role player, and I think paying him $20 million a year would make it unnecessarily and increasingly hard to do, especially with the expectations in terms of role this figure would create.
So, the perimeter player who had the highest pts per touch on our team should be developed as a roleplayer? Keep in mind, he has higher pts per touch than Jalen Brunson. Also of note, when RJ's touches increased we were a .500 team, you think it would be wise to develop that guy into a roleplayer. Listen, I'd respect your position if you just said "Man.......**** RJ" it would make more sense to me than trying to pen these think pieces on him that don't seem logical at all to me. Imagine a team drafting someone 3rd and then turning them into a role player because they're not a 1, they haven't even tried to see if he could be a 2 yet, because his touches in the offense aren't close to what a 2 gets.
Anyway, I understand the reality.
It's over, you're facing reality.
It is a reality-based argument, with different propositions depending on the outcomes dictated concurrently by his market value and by the trade market:
My stance is:
- $10 million is a fair contract
- $15 is a reasonable overpay that bets on his upside
- $20 is an outrageous overpay and one the Knicks should not entertain this summer
- A max deal could become one of the worst contracts in NBA history
- If you can trade RJ as the centerpiece of a trade for a star, for an upgrade on the wings or for unprotected firsts before signing him to an extension, then you do it.
I absolutely believe that Huerter, O'Neale and Tucker are better players than RJ today. Again, RJ does nothing well outside of C&S 3s, isolation defense, and rebounding for his position. O'Neale and Tucker are
much better defenders than RJ, and can easily replicate what RJ does best on offense (C&S 3s), if they're not better at it. Huerter is not worse than RJ on defense and he's more efficient on offense.
You think this comes from a place of dislike but it's backed by actual data. I read the data first, then adjust my opinion. I dislike RJ's game because the statistical evidence suggests that it lacks substance and that it should be disliked. Not the other way around. I was a big believer in RJ coming out of Duke, and one of this defenders his first two seasons in the league.
About Brown, their 3rd seasons in the NBA are fairly similar in impact (though Brown was much more efficient relative to league-average), but that doesn't mean that their curves are similar. Brown has always been much more efficient scoring the ball than RJ (never fell much lower than league-average), and his second season was much more promising than any season that RJ's ever had. He also always had a higher upside because of his athleticism.
RJ has a high point per touch because he's mostly a C&S 3-point shooter and an aggressive driver with blinders. He doesn't really pass the ball. He wants to score. Point per touch is not an indicator of efficiency anyway. It just says that his usage is mostly dedicated to scoring (20th percentile in APG among players with a usage of 25 or higher), which he doesn't do efficiently and thus creates a lot of empty possessions for the Knicks.
The issue with looking at totals and per game stats with RJ is that it ignores all the possessions that are
wasted due to him throwing up bricks or missing lay-ups.
Let's see how he looks next year, wherever he plays.
I have already said I will admit I was wrong if RJ ever averages 20 ppg on above league-average scoring efficiency. I think it's a reasonable measure for secondary scoring. Of course, he can become a valuable player even if he doesn't reach that milestone, but I never denied that.
