Moderators: DG88, niQ, Duffman100, Reeko, lebron stopper, HiJiNX, 7 Footer, Morris_Shatford
ConSarnit wrote:What is going on in this thread? Multiple posters saying RJ is a good 3pt shooter. He’s a career 35% 3pt shooter. That’s below league average. When you consider 3pt% by position he rates even lower (league average at sg is 37%).
You guys can like RJ. He does some things well. But when you make claims that are factually incorrect you lose credibility.
ConSarnit wrote:What is going on in this thread? Multiple posters saying RJ is a good 3pt shooter. He’s a career 35% 3pt shooter. That’s below league average. When you consider 3pt% by position he rates even lower (league average at sg is 37%).
You guys can like RJ. He does some things well. But when you make claims that are factually incorrect you lose credibility.
CPT wrote:The Ringer had him 80 on their top 100 as of June 4th (not exactly new, but it popped up on my feed).
Make what you will of The Ringer's level of analysis, but this is actually higher than I would have expected. When looking at the list, it feels kinda reasonable. There are guys below him I would have higher, but he's also behind a few guys that he maybe shouldn't be.
Interestingly, he was at 68 in January and has been dropping. That's probably evidence of the list being content mill slop more than anything, but it seems relevant to the conversation.
ConSarnit wrote:Indeed wrote:James_Raptors wrote:
Because basketball isn't a simple eye test, opinion vs opinion. Some advanced metrics matter, and in that regard, RJ cannot out-run the holes in his game. If he was on a reduced salary playing a 6th man role in specific key situation, sure, maybe we can discuss that. It's simply too difficult ho hide his defensive liabilities AND the fact that he lacks a mid-range shot, AND that he can't even muster to shoot FT's at a 70% clip when the SG league average is in the 80%+ range, or that he's one of the worst 4PT shooting SG's in the league, AND that although he's a slasher (which is great, and we need) he finishes predictably at a low/less than league avg rate. Do you see why this is more than simply opinion stances here and that some basketball statistics are involved?
And now we have BI. We still have one basketball, there simply isn't that many mouths to feed. The problem with RJ is that if he's not getting his touches, he's now a marginal scorer. Because he's so inefficient, historically and more of an ISO player, he needs the ball in his hands, was a high USG player, and takes a lot of shats (once again, making up for his inefficiency)
If you don't watch the games, you might look at NBA playtype stats. Barrett is better being an off ball with cuts.
He plays both on and off the ball, able to shoot the 3s.
What you are describing is Barnes, so inefficient being both on and off ball.
Barrett has never had a season above 50th percentile on cuts. Barrett’s cut frequency is also around 5%, which would rank him around 300th league wide. So not only is Barrett a low volume cutter, when he does he’s bad at it.
He shoots below league average from 3 and plays a position with the highest shooting 3pt%.
How are you going to tell people to look at play type stats when you are completely wrong about them?
James_Raptors wrote: more of an ISO player
MEDIC wrote:James_Raptors wrote: more of an ISO player
I don't see him as an iso player at all. In fact, that's why I like his game. He gets a lot of his points in transition, off ball cuts & wide open 3's. He is also a willing passer. With BI on the team, he should be even better in those areas.
I don't see the ball sticking with RJ. He typically makes quick/ aggressive decisions with the ball & off the ball.
Derozan is an isolation scorer. Dribble, dribble, dribble until he finds a mismatch or gets to his spot.
James_Raptors wrote:DD had reached unplayable status in the playoffs, literally, to the point of getting benched. He was gifted a starting job at SG on Day1, and pretty much played in Toronto without much of a defensive game and limited range. Much like RJ (now) he would attempt multiple bone-headed drive into multiple opponents type of offense .He's a hard working , loyal player, but also a perennial loser, (mostly) because he's been miscast as a starting SG on team who aspires to be elite. Which he could not fulfill, due to the gaping holes on both ends of the court. The day he was traded, our ceiling rose (with or without Kawhi inc).
GLF wrote:MEDIC wrote:James_Raptors wrote: more of an ISO player
I don't see him as an iso player at all. In fact, that's why I like his game. He gets a lot of his points in transition, off ball cuts & wide open 3's. He is also a willing passer. With BI on the team, he should be even better in those areas.
I don't see the ball sticking with RJ. He typically makes quick/ aggressive decisions with the ball & off the ball.
Derozan is an isolation scorer. Dribble, dribble, dribble until he finds a mismatch or gets to his spot.
Exactly. Apart of why RJ wasn’t as efficient this season as he was last season with us is because there was a big point this season where it was just him and Gradey healthy. He got forced into having to be the number one option which of course is not his game. So he wasn’t able to stick to scoring in the ways he’s best at. He had to take more off the dribble or pull up 3s/ midrange shots and he was the focus so he wouldn’t get as much good looks at the basket. He also got sick later in the season and came back clearly a lot skinnier. I think he got sick a couple of times this past season that kept him out. He spoke about not being able to eat and throwing up a lot which caused him to lose weight. And we know his strength and being able to bully guys is a big part of his game. Then we started tanking and he was playing like every other night bc we were sitting guys and he could not catch a rhythm just like IQ.
RJ is much better off the ball than on. People also forget he’s a good enough catch and shoot 3 point shooter. It’s the none catch and shoot 3s he had to take that caused his 3 point percentage to be 35%. Now that same above experience allowed him to show his improved play making so a positive did come out of that. With BI added and if we stay healthy and RJ can stay being the 3rd or 4th option, I think his efficiency will shoot right back up. He will also have an offseason to really work on his game because last offseason he was focused on the Olympics. He even spoke at the exit interviews about how much he was burnt out by season’s end because of going straight from the Olympics to the regular season. If RJ is traded, he’s traded and I would understand why, but I do think he’s going to be good for us next season if he’s here and isn’t this next level bad fit people think. He isn’t the perfect fit but he isn’t the worst either. We have other issues that to me are bigger than any perceived issue RJ presents.
MEDIC wrote:GLF wrote:MEDIC wrote:
I don't see him as an iso player at all. In fact, that's why I like his game. He gets a lot of his points in transition, off ball cuts & wide open 3's. He is also a willing passer. With BI on the team, he should be even better in those areas.
I don't see the ball sticking with RJ. He typically makes quick/ aggressive decisions with the ball & off the ball.
Derozan is an isolation scorer. Dribble, dribble, dribble until he finds a mismatch or gets to his spot.
Exactly. Apart of why RJ wasn’t as efficient this season as he was last season with us is because there was a big point this season where it was just him and Gradey healthy. He got forced into having to be the number one option which of course is not his game. So he wasn’t able to stick to scoring in the ways he’s best at. He had to take more off the dribble or pull up 3s/ midrange shots and he was the focus so he wouldn’t get as much good looks at the basket. He also got sick later in the season and came back clearly a lot skinnier. I think he got sick a couple of times this past season that kept him out. He spoke about not being able to eat and throwing up a lot which caused him to lose weight. And we know his strength and being able to bully guys is a big part of his game. Then we started tanking and he was playing like every other night bc we were sitting guys and he could not catch a rhythm just like IQ.
RJ is much better off the ball than on. People also forget he’s a good enough catch and shoot 3 point shooter. It’s the none catch and shoot 3s he had to take that caused his 3 point percentage to be 35%. Now that same above experience allowed him to show his improved play making so a positive did come out of that. With BI added and if we stay healthy and RJ can stay being the 3rd or 4th option, I think his efficiency will shoot right back up. He will also have an offseason to really work on his game because last offseason he was focused on the Olympics. He even spoke at the exit interviews about how much he was burnt out by season’s end because of going straight from the Olympics to the regular season. If RJ is traded, he’s traded and I would understand why, but I do think he’s going to be good for us next season if he’s here and isn’t this next level bad fit people think. He isn’t the perfect fit but he isn’t the worst either. We have other issues that to me are bigger than any perceived issue RJ presents.
I'm not evaluating any of our players based on what happened this past season. It was basically a year of practicing things that players weren't comfortable with & the team wasn't trying to win. At one point Scottie was taking 8 above the break pull up 3's. RJ was handling the ball & initiating the offense way too much, while also tasked with being primary option. The best version of RJ is the one we saw post trade in a complimentary scorer role. A lot more off the ball scoring opportunities. I expect this season he will go back to that role.
Scottie looked bad for much of the year, RJ looked bad for much of the year, Quick looked bad for much of the year. It was just a throw away season. Bad basketball overall.
I am super curious to see what they all look like by 2026. We will have a pretty solid idea of what is working, what the teams needs are, who fits & who doesn't.
earthtone wrote:ConSarnit wrote:What is going on in this thread? Multiple posters saying RJ is a good 3pt shooter. He’s a career 35% 3pt shooter. That’s below league average. When you consider 3pt% by position he rates even lower (league average at sg is 37%).
You guys can like RJ. He does some things well. But when you make claims that are factually incorrect you lose credibility.
I haven’t seen a single person claim he’s a good 3pt shooter…
ConSarnit wrote:earthtone wrote:ConSarnit wrote:What is going on in this thread? Multiple posters saying RJ is a good 3pt shooter. He’s a career 35% 3pt shooter. That’s below league average. When you consider 3pt% by position he rates even lower (league average at sg is 37%).
You guys can like RJ. He does some things well. But when you make claims that are factually incorrect you lose credibility.
I haven’t seen a single person claim he’s a good 3pt shooter…
Post #102. You literally liked it.
Indeed wrote:ConSarnit wrote:Indeed wrote:
If you don't watch the games, you might look at NBA playtype stats. Barrett is better being an off ball with cuts.
He plays both on and off the ball, able to shoot the 3s.
What you are describing is Barnes, so inefficient being both on and off ball.
Barrett has never had a season above 50th percentile on cuts. Barrett’s cut frequency is also around 5%, which would rank him around 300th league wide. So not only is Barrett a low volume cutter, when he does he’s bad at it.
He shoots below league average from 3 and plays a position with the highest shooting 3pt%.
How are you going to tell people to look at play type stats when you are completely wrong about them?
I am unsure you can base on frequency, since the lineup he was playing lacked ball handler that can attack the rim. Are you expecting to shift his on ball to Dick or Agbaji or Mitchell (Quickley was hardly playing with him)? And outside of our C, most of our perimeter players are below 10% frequency (outside of Brown), that says a lot on our offense.
As for below 50th percentile, none of our players are above 50% except Bouncher and Olynyk, that also proves my theory that our problem is lacking spaces due to having non-shooting bigs.
Scase wrote:It's not a straw man, it was hyperbole, my bad lol.
My point was less directed at you specifically, and more so at the crowd that thinks Scottie is cooked, but RJ is primed for some next step.
tsherkin wrote:earthtone wrote:Saying RJ can’t improve on his game is an opinion.
He’s already made increases in every raw counting stat, efficiency stat, and impact metric since joining the Raptors. Its possible he regresses, its possible he plateaus, its possible he improves.
He hasn't actually improved his efficiency outside of that partial season after the trade, though. And he's regressed at the foul line without consistent improvement on his ATB 3s.
There IS a chance that he can improve some. He's entering what is typically thought of as his prime years, after all. But we haven't seen any kind of real arc of improvement in his shooting ability, which is his first major issue on O, and contributes heavily to his inefficiency. His D has improved to acceptable and his passing has improved, both of which are encouraging. So there's a chance, and seeing him work in a more permissive environment may reveal that we CAN rely on him in certain ways (such as bombing more from the corner and stripping away any kind of shooting outside of the paint otherwise) and turn that into a workable player...
But that does get us back to "is that worth $30+ mil a year when we have other guys coming up?"
So we have to see what he does, really, is what it keeps coming back to.
earthtone wrote:His TS% hasn’t improved much because of his horrendous year at the line, but everywhere else on the court he’s been a much more efficient player.
His next contract won’t start until 2027. If we extend him this offseason at ~$30mil a year to cover his age 27-29 seasons, I think there’s a good chance it ends up being a below-market deal
ConSarnit wrote:Indeed wrote:ConSarnit wrote:
Barrett has never had a season above 50th percentile on cuts. Barrett’s cut frequency is also around 5%, which would rank him around 300th league wide. So not only is Barrett a low volume cutter, when he does he’s bad at it.
He shoots below league average from 3 and plays a position with the highest shooting 3pt%.
How are you going to tell people to look at play type stats when you are completely wrong about them?
I am unsure you can base on frequency, since the lineup he was playing lacked ball handler that can attack the rim. Are you expecting to shift his on ball to Dick or Agbaji or Mitchell (Quickley was hardly playing with him)? And outside of our C, most of our perimeter players are below 10% frequency (outside of Brown), that says a lot on our offense.
As for below 50th percentile, none of our players are above 50% except Bouncher and Olynyk, that also proves my theory that our problem is lacking spaces due to having non-shooting bigs.
You said he’s better off-ball when he is factually below average at cutting. What point are you trying to make? Is it supposed to be a feather in RJ’s cap that he is below average at cutting? How does that help us? Do you know who else compromises spacing? RJ, who shoots below league average from 3.
Think about your argument for a second. We should be happy that RJ will be moving more off-ball when he is decidedly not good at that either (at least when it comes to cutting)? He has never been a good cutter at any time, even when playing with ball handlers. How is that a positive?
If you are trying to use RJ’s cutting “ability” as a pro in your argument for RJ you are not doing a good job selling RJ.
Tell me RJ is a good driver. Tell me he draws free throws. Tell me his passing has improved. Don’t try and sell me on things that has proven to not be good at. He’s not a good off ball player and when you put that in context of this team (and its flaws) you can see how he’d be the odd man out.