Official RJ Barrett Thread

[bonjovi0308]

It is rare for someone his size.that his free throw % is actually horrible relatively speaking. I don't know why is that but I guess if it can be fixed it should be fixed already.

[RoteSchroder]

He shot a reasonably uncharacteristic (but not unprecedented) percentage from 3 last year... on much higher passing support.

It's not due to higher passing support imo. His catch and shoot 3's since his 2nd year: 41%, 36.8%, 32.3%, 37.2%, 38.5% (this year). Each year with over 4 attempts per game.

His pull up shooting percentages have been consistently atrocious. Last season on the Raps, he took 0.1 pull up 3's per game. This year he's taking 1.8 pull up 3's per game.

I went over this already. The passing support difference in his 32 games with us was significant compared to any other period in his career. Have a look.

That said, with us last year, he also enjoyed 62.2% of his 2PA assisted, and 97.9% of his 3s, versus career averages of 42.3% and 93.8%, and seeing 29.3% and 76.0% so far this season.

3FGM assisted per game (percent of made 3's that were assisted)

2020-2021 Knicks: 1.66 threes (97.6%)
2021-2022 Knicks: 1.83 threes (91.3%)
2022-2023 Knicks: 1.57 threes (92.6%)
2023-2024 Knicks: 1.7 (100%)
2023-2024 Raptors: 1.47 threes (97.9%)
2024 Raptors: 1.6 threes (76%)

What's your logic on how he had a career low in assisted threes made, but the extra "passing support" somehow boosted his 3 point %?

[Scase]

Yeah, that's just not true at all. He's never shot the ball anywhere close to the 55% he did in Toronto last year over a 30 game stretch with New York. He's never even shot better than 50% for a month ever before while he was in New York.

I didn't go through the numbers they posted with a fine toothed comb, so you might be right. But even if you are, that still proves nothing other than a 30 game outlier vs 300+ games of data.

Also it still does nothing to show that HE was the improvement, and not the system. Unless you think he magically got better for no reason. Again, there is nothing at all to point to improvement being anything HE did, vs how he's being utilized. Which the current stretch of games kinda proves, change up the system or roster, and he plays like trash.

If you think that is an admirable trait for a player, be my guest, but I don't.

If you are utilized in a way that fits your strengths well and you are productive and efficient as a result, you have improved as a player. I don't get why all the credit would go to the system rather than the player in this instance.

If I give you a gun, and tell you to shoot a bullseye on a target 100ft away, and you miss 90% of the time, then I move the target so then it is only 20ft away, and then you start hitting 90% of the time, you didn't just become the greatest marksman the world has ever seen. The entire situation has changed, if you have bad tendencies and require being put in the perfect system to mitigate them as much as possible, and you see improvements. That's the system at work.

Saying "Hey RJ, you suck at these things, stop doing them, and just follow the lines on the white board, we'll get you the ball in great places." that isn't a player becoming magically better overnight, that's a different system entirely.

RJ has not played differently, he's been instructed to be at different places. Listening, while important, is not improvement, unless the argument is that he sucked in NYC because he never listened. And yet again, it was 30 games, relax.

[Boogie!]

He wouldn't have to if he wasn't horrifically inefficient otherwise. Consistency is, and always has been the knock on RJ, and nothing has changed that to date. I would rather him be an efficient 15/5/5 than the massive swings of impact and efficiency he is now.

This isn't new criticism, it's been around since his Knicks days. You guys just come out of the wood works when he finally has a really good game.

Why was everyone always on fvvs jock despite his inefficiency? You’re talking about rj since his knicks days like he wasn’t just coming off a rookie contract. The guy is 24 years old not **** 28. When Demar derozan first became an all star with us at 24 he was putting up worse numbers than rj. And I remember every **** year the discussion was he’s still getting better he’s still young he’s still getting better. It’s maddening hearing how people can’t even be consistent with this logic.

Who tf cares about this? He's in YEAR SIX of his career, and the best he's shown for efficiency is 30 games. He's had stints like this before, and he'll have stints like this again. He was inefficient in college and he's been inefficient in the NBA, he is a veteran player, stop acting like just because he's 24 he can make some miraculous turnaround in efficiency based on literally no evidence.

And why does DD matter at all in this? You're comparing a player who made an all star appearance with 1 year LESS experience, stop using the age as a crutch. You're also trying to compare a 12 game sample size to DD's 79.

I don't care about the counting stats, I made that evidently clear in my previous post, I'm talking about his efficiency. He has done an admirable job so far this season handling the ball and bumping the assist numbers, but that's also because he's rocking a 31% USG%, with 36% and 34% in the last 2 games respectively.

No one ever said RJ couldn't put up stats on volume. The question is can he do it without bottom of the league efficiency levels.

What’s your opinion on Norman Powell

[tsherkin]

3FGM assisted per game (percent of made 3's that were assisted)

2020-2021 Knicks: 1.66 threes (97.6%)
2021-2022 Knicks: 1.83 threes (91.3%)
2022-2023 Knicks: 1.57 threes (92.6%)
2023-2024 Knicks: 1.7 (100%)
2023-2024 Raptors: 1.47 threes (97.9%)
2024 Raptors: 1.6 threes (76%)

What's your logic on how he had a career low in assisted threes made, but the extra "passing support" somehow boosted his 3 point %?

...

Is that a serious question?

His 3pt volume went down but his proportion of assisted baskets from 3 went up. Of course his 3P% went up, that's how math works...

Yeah, I think that's not in any way actual reality. If RJ had a 40% TS stretch over 32 games, we would be thinking he absolutely stinks and how to dump his toxic contract, not thinking he's just the same player as in New York on a rough stretch.

I mean, people were considering him a toxic contract this season, so that has definitely happened. Entertainingly, however, that has not been the message I have specifically been making despite expressing significant concern and skepticism over RJ last season. So I'm not sure how you thought that'd be an effective argument.

No, I'm treating it as maybe this player isn't as bad as I thought he was. He doesn't need to sustain what he did last year to still exceed what he did as a Knick.

I agree with that second sentence, yes.

Even this year with his efficiency down, his scoring is up and passing drastically improved, so he's still improved as a player from his Knick days.

Scoring up with efficiency down isn't actually a good thing in any way.

[RoteSchroder]

3FGM assisted per game (percent of made 3's that were assisted)

2020-2021 Knicks: 1.66 threes (97.6%)
2021-2022 Knicks: 1.83 threes (91.3%)
2022-2023 Knicks: 1.57 threes (92.6%)
2023-2024 Knicks: 1.7 (100%)
2023-2024 Raptors: 1.47 threes (97.9%)
2024 Raptors: 1.6 threes (76%)

What's your logic on how he had a career low in assisted threes made, but the extra "passing support" somehow boosted his 3 point %?

...

Is that a serious question?

His 3pt volume went down but his proportion of assisted baskets from 3 went up. Of course his 3P% went up, that's how math works...

Yeah, I think that's not in any way actual reality. If RJ had a 40% TS stretch over 32 games, we would be thinking he absolutely stinks and how to dump his toxic contract, not thinking he's just the same player as in New York on a rough stretch.

I mean, people were considering him a toxic contract this season, so that has definitely happened. Entertainingly, however, that has not been the message I have specifically been making despite expressing significant concern and skepticism over RJ last season. So I'm not sure how you thought that'd be an effective argument.

No, I'm treating it as maybe this player isn't as bad as I thought he was. He doesn't need to sustain what he did last year to still exceed what he did as a Knick.

I agree with that second sentence, yes.

Even this year with his efficiency down, his scoring is up and passing drastically improved, so he's still improved as a player from his Knick days.

Scoring up with efficiency down isn't actually a good thing in any way.

Don’t move goal posts. Yes, proportion of assisted to unassisted baskets went up. Total volume of assisted 3’s also went down. If he’s getting less assisted baskets per game, how does that equate to extra “passing support”?

Is he getting more catch and shoot opportunities per game due to this “passing support”? Yes or no.

Approximating based off memory cause I’m on my phone.

Knicks: ~1.7/4.4 assisted VS 0/0.6 unassisted (5.65 assisted attempts per 36)

Raptors: ~1.47/3.7 assisted VS 0.03/0.1 unassisted (4.16 assisted attempts per 36)

Explain to me how a lower volume of assisted opportunities means he’s getting additional “passing support” on 3’s?

Or did he just lower unassisted shot attempts?

[PushDaRock]

I didn't go through the numbers they posted with a fine toothed comb, so you might be right. But even if you are, that still proves nothing other than a 30 game outlier vs 300+ games of data.

Also it still does nothing to show that HE was the improvement, and not the system. Unless you think he magically got better for no reason. Again, there is nothing at all to point to improvement being anything HE did, vs how he's being utilized. Which the current stretch of games kinda proves, change up the system or roster, and he plays like trash.

If you think that is an admirable trait for a player, be my guest, but I don't.

If you are utilized in a way that fits your strengths well and you are productive and efficient as a result, you have improved as a player. I don't get why all the credit would go to the system rather than the player in this instance.

If I give you a gun, and tell you to shoot a bullseye on a target 100ft away, and you miss 90% of the time, then I move the target so then it is only 20ft away, and then you start hitting 90% of the time, you didn't just become the greatest marksman the world has ever seen. The entire situation has changed, if you have bad tendencies and require being put in the perfect system to mitigate them as much as possible, and you see improvements. That's the system at work.

Saying "Hey RJ, you suck at these things, stop doing them, and just follow the lines on the white board, we'll get you the ball in great places." that isn't a player becoming magically better overnight, that's a different system entirely.

RJ has not played differently, he's been instructed to be at different places. Listening, while important, is not improvement, unless the argument is that he sucked in NYC because he never listened. And yet again, it was 30 games, relax.

If the point of the game is to put the ball in the basket more and you do that more effectively, you improved as a player. I don't understand how that is debatable in any way. It doesn't matter what system was put in place to optimize that, the player still improved. A big part of improvement is becoming a smarter player.

[PushDaRock]

3FGM assisted per game (percent of made 3's that were assisted)

2020-2021 Knicks: 1.66 threes (97.6%)
2021-2022 Knicks: 1.83 threes (91.3%)
2022-2023 Knicks: 1.57 threes (92.6%)
2023-2024 Knicks: 1.7 (100%)
2023-2024 Raptors: 1.47 threes (97.9%)
2024 Raptors: 1.6 threes (76%)

What's your logic on how he had a career low in assisted threes made, but the extra "passing support" somehow boosted his 3 point %?

...

Is that a serious question?

His 3pt volume went down but his proportion of assisted baskets from 3 went up. Of course his 3P% went up, that's how math works...

Yeah, I think that's not in any way actual reality. If RJ had a 40% TS stretch over 32 games, we would be thinking he absolutely stinks and how to dump his toxic contract, not thinking he's just the same player as in New York on a rough stretch.

I mean, people were considering him a toxic contract this season, so that has definitely happened. Entertainingly, however, that has not been the message I have specifically been making despite expressing significant concern and skepticism over RJ last season. So I'm not sure how you thought that'd be an effective argument.

No, I'm treating it as maybe this player isn't as bad as I thought he was. He doesn't need to sustain what he did last year to still exceed what he did as a Knick.

I agree with that second sentence, yes.

Even this year with his efficiency down, his scoring is up and passing drastically improved, so he's still improved as a player from his Knick days.

Scoring up with efficiency down isn't actually a good thing in any way.

I'm not even sure what is being argued at this point.

If you go from 18 ppg on 51% TS to 23 ppg on 51% TS, that's a 5 ppg improvement on the same efficiency. That isn't conducive to winning but the player has still increased their own production and that's an improvement.

[Mattatron]

3FGM assisted per game (percent of made 3's that were assisted)

2020-2021 Knicks: 1.66 threes (97.6%)
2021-2022 Knicks: 1.83 threes (91.3%)
2022-2023 Knicks: 1.57 threes (92.6%)
2023-2024 Knicks: 1.7 (100%)
2023-2024 Raptors: 1.47 threes (97.9%)
2024 Raptors: 1.6 threes (76%)

What's your logic on how he had a career low in assisted threes made, but the extra "passing support" somehow boosted his 3 point %?

...

Is that a serious question?

His 3pt volume went down but his proportion of assisted baskets from 3 went up. Of course his 3P% went up, that's how math works...

Yeah, I think that's not in any way actual reality. If RJ had a 40% TS stretch over 32 games, we would be thinking he absolutely stinks and how to dump his toxic contract, not thinking he's just the same player as in New York on a rough stretch.

I mean, people were considering him a toxic contract this season, so that has definitely happened. Entertainingly, however, that has not been the message I have specifically been making despite expressing significant concern and skepticism over RJ last season. So I'm not sure how you thought that'd be an effective argument.

No, I'm treating it as maybe this player isn't as bad as I thought he was. He doesn't need to sustain what he did last year to still exceed what he did as a Knick.

I agree with that second sentence, yes.

Even this year with his efficiency down, his scoring is up and passing drastically improved, so he's still improved as a player from his Knick days.

Scoring up with efficiency down isn't actually a good thing in any way.

I'm not even sure what is being argued at this point.

If you go from 18 ppg on 51% TS to 23 ppg on 51% TS, that's a 5 ppg improvement on the same efficiency. That isn't conducive to winning but the player has still increased their own production and that's an improvement.

It's not an improvement at all, when he took 14fga in new york and now 19fga in toronto just to make 5 more points with 5 more shots. Especially while only having 47%efg.
He's just taking more shots.

[Johnny Bball]

Everyone here would trade RJ for Tyrese Maxey in a heartbeat, right? But if you look at Maxey, he's suffering from exactly the same type of problem right now. With Embiid hurt, and PG out, Maxey has been horribly inefficient and jacking up 14 3's a game.. He's also not distributing as well. I don't think one person here would say he's just a bad or inefficient player, or they would never want him on their team.

He's just simply forced into a role right now that he's not suited to. And I think it's a decent comparison. And at least more useful than the last two pages that have been dominated by two people that can't see the forest for the trees.

[PushDaRock]

...

Is that a serious question?

His 3pt volume went down but his proportion of assisted baskets from 3 went up. Of course his 3P% went up, that's how math works...



I mean, people were considering him a toxic contract this season, so that has definitely happened. Entertainingly, however, that has not been the message I have specifically been making despite expressing significant concern and skepticism over RJ last season. So I'm not sure how you thought that'd be an effective argument.



I agree with that second sentence, yes.



Scoring up with efficiency down isn't actually a good thing in any way.

I'm not even sure what is being argued at this point.

If you go from 18 ppg on 51% TS to 23 ppg on 51% TS, that's a 5 ppg improvement on the same efficiency. That isn't conducive to winning but the player has still increased their own production and that's an improvement.

It's not an improvement at all, when he took 14fga in new york and now 19fga in toronto just to make 5 more points with 5 more shots. Especially while only having 47%efg.
He's just taking more shots.

That's like saying Jak didn't improve at all either and he's just taking more shots since his eFG% dropped from 65.6% to 60.8% this season.

Again, I'm not sayin it's a massive improvement or that it's a good thing to have him taking more shots at below average efficiency as it pertains to helping us win games, only that a bump in production is still improvement nonetheless.

[SaveTheHens]

Too early to give up on RJ, as long as he can reign in and play his role with our main guys i want him here. Playing without our main playmakers has changed his role, lets see how he does when Scotties back

[tsherkin]

Don’t move goal posts. Yes, proportion of assisted to unassisted baskets went up. Total volume of assisted 3’s also went down. If he’s getting less assisted baskets per game, how does that equate to extra “passing support”?

I moved no goalposts. The proportion of assisted made 3s is up. That's why it was nearly 98%. The total volume was down, so the total makes per game were also down.

Explain to me how a lower volume of assisted opportunities means he’s getting additional “passing support” on 3’s?

Or did he just lower unassisted shot attempts?

That's a fair question, though it accesses other things I"ve been saying in this thread very consistently. You're making a semantic argument which is functionally the same as what I"ve been saying this entire time: he needs to focus his 3PA toward assisted looks. And that's what he was doing. A higher-proportion of assisted buckets. You digging deep to discern the difference between him getting more raw volume of assisted makes is immaterial to my point. No, he wasn't getting a higher raw volume of assisted shots, he was getting a higher PROPORTION of assisted shots, which is what I said. He was not taking nearly as many unassisted looks, because those are not his forte.

[Boogie!]

it's weird how the basis of this argument has now become scoring efficiency when evaluating rj's game - which again still completely dismisses youth and his potential improvement... and yet norman powell has been the most efficient scorer the raptors ever had, and we released him at his peak, and people bitched and complained about him too... so is efficiency the be all and end all or not?

[Johnny Bball]

Don’t move goal posts. Yes, proportion of assisted to unassisted baskets went up. Total volume of assisted 3’s also went down. If he’s getting less assisted baskets per game, how does that equate to extra “passing support”?

I moved no goalposts. The proportion of assisted made 3s is up. That's why it was nearly 98%. The total volume was down, so the total makes per game were also down.

Explain to me how a lower volume of assisted opportunities means he’s getting additional “passing support” on 3’s?

Or did he just lower unassisted shot attempts?

That's a fair question, though it accesses other things I"ve been saying in this thread very consistently. You're making a semantic argument which is functionally the same as what I"ve been saying this entire time: he needs to focus his 3PA toward assisted looks. And that's what he was doing. A higher-proportion of assisted buckets. You digging deep to discern the difference between him getting more raw volume of assisted makes is immaterial to my point. No, he wasn't getting a higher raw volume of assisted shots, he was getting a higher PROPORTION of assisted shots, which is what I said. He was not taking nearly as many unassisted looks, because those are not his forte.

No, he needs to be shooting more often from the corners, playing from the wings and not being the primary ballhandler, which is what he's not doing for the most right now. And which he can't do until the other two guys or at least one comes back.

Every point someone makes is a semantic argument and immaterial to what you've already decided though isn't it.

[lebron stopper]

Need to see more of RJ in upcoming games, especially how he plays off of Scottie once he returns. But honestly the only aspect of his game that truly impresses me so far this season is his improved playmaking out of the spread pick and roll. Those behind-the-back passes to Poeltl are really neat. That kind of playmaking is a good value add, but it's not quite enough to make me think he's now a core piece for this team.

[LoveMyRaps]

What are RJ's numbers without IQ and Scottie?

I'd imagine the efficiency numbers aren't great, but he's still stuffing the stat sheet.

[Scase]

Why was everyone always on fvvs jock despite his inefficiency? You’re talking about rj since his knicks days like he wasn’t just coming off a rookie contract. The guy is 24 years old not **** 28. When Demar derozan first became an all star with us at 24 he was putting up worse numbers than rj. And I remember every **** year the discussion was he’s still getting better he’s still young he’s still getting better. It’s maddening hearing how people can’t even be consistent with this logic.

Who tf cares about this? He's in YEAR SIX of his career, and the best he's shown for efficiency is 30 games. He's had stints like this before, and he'll have stints like this again. He was inefficient in college and he's been inefficient in the NBA, he is a veteran player, stop acting like just because he's 24 he can make some miraculous turnaround in efficiency based on literally no evidence.

And why does DD matter at all in this? You're comparing a player who made an all star appearance with 1 year LESS experience, stop using the age as a crutch. You're also trying to compare a 12 game sample size to DD's 79.

I don't care about the counting stats, I made that evidently clear in my previous post, I'm talking about his efficiency. He has done an admirable job so far this season handling the ball and bumping the assist numbers, but that's also because he's rocking a 31% USG%, with 36% and 34% in the last 2 games respectively.

No one ever said RJ couldn't put up stats on volume. The question is can he do it without bottom of the league efficiency levels.

What’s your opinion on Norman Powell

Like my personal opinion of him as a player, in regard to efficiency, or compared to RJ overall?

Not sure how to answer the question tbh.

If you are utilized in a way that fits your strengths well and you are productive and efficient as a result, you have improved as a player. I don't get why all the credit would go to the system rather than the player in this instance.

If I give you a gun, and tell you to shoot a bullseye on a target 100ft away, and you miss 90% of the time, then I move the target so then it is only 20ft away, and then you start hitting 90% of the time, you didn't just become the greatest marksman the world has ever seen. The entire situation has changed, if you have bad tendencies and require being put in the perfect system to mitigate them as much as possible, and you see improvements. That's the system at work.

Saying "Hey RJ, you suck at these things, stop doing them, and just follow the lines on the white board, we'll get you the ball in great places." that isn't a player becoming magically better overnight, that's a different system entirely.

RJ has not played differently, he's been instructed to be at different places. Listening, while important, is not improvement, unless the argument is that he sucked in NYC because he never listened. And yet again, it was 30 games, relax.

If the point of the game is to put the ball in the basket more and you do that more effectively, you improved as a player. I don't understand how that is debatable in any way. It doesn't matter what system was put in place to optimize that, the player still improved. A big part of improvement is becoming a smarter player.

Again, move the target closer, you don't become a better shot, you changed the entire system. If RJ improved as much as you are trying to imply, then we wouldn't be seeing the performances this year and his entire game shifting back to playing exactly like he did in NYC.

The system has changed due to a bunch of injuries, and his efficiency has plummeted. If he was truly improved, we wouldn't be seeing more of the same RJ, but rather the new and improved one.

[PushDaRock]

Who tf cares about this? He's in YEAR SIX of his career, and the best he's shown for efficiency is 30 games. He's had stints like this before, and he'll have stints like this again. He was inefficient in college and he's been inefficient in the NBA, he is a veteran player, stop acting like just because he's 24 he can make some miraculous turnaround in efficiency based on literally no evidence.

And why does DD matter at all in this? You're comparing a player who made an all star appearance with 1 year LESS experience, stop using the age as a crutch. You're also trying to compare a 12 game sample size to DD's 79.

I don't care about the counting stats, I made that evidently clear in my previous post, I'm talking about his efficiency. He has done an admirable job so far this season handling the ball and bumping the assist numbers, but that's also because he's rocking a 31% USG%, with 36% and 34% in the last 2 games respectively.

No one ever said RJ couldn't put up stats on volume. The question is can he do it without bottom of the league efficiency levels.

What’s your opinion on Norman Powell

Like my personal opinion of him as a player, in regard to efficiency, or compared to RJ overall?

Not sure how to answer the question tbh.

If I give you a gun, and tell you to shoot a bullseye on a target 100ft away, and you miss 90% of the time, then I move the target so then it is only 20ft away, and then you start hitting 90% of the time, you didn't just become the greatest marksman the world has ever seen. The entire situation has changed, if you have bad tendencies and require being put in the perfect system to mitigate them as much as possible, and you see improvements. That's the system at work.

Saying "Hey RJ, you suck at these things, stop doing them, and just follow the lines on the white board, we'll get you the ball in great places." that isn't a player becoming magically better overnight, that's a different system entirely.

RJ has not played differently, he's been instructed to be at different places. Listening, while important, is not improvement, unless the argument is that he sucked in NYC because he never listened. And yet again, it was 30 games, relax.

If the point of the game is to put the ball in the basket more and you do that more effectively, you improved as a player. I don't understand how that is debatable in any way. It doesn't matter what system was put in place to optimize that, the player still improved. A big part of improvement is becoming a smarter player.

Again, move the target closer, you don't become a better shot, you changed the entire system. If RJ improved as much as you are trying to imply, then we wouldn't be seeing the performances this year and his entire game shifting back to playing exactly like he did in NYC.

The system has changed due to a bunch of injuries, and his efficiency has plummeted. If he was truly improved, we wouldn't be seeing more of the same RJ, but rather the new and improved one.

If the sport is hitting the target and you can move closer to the target to hit it more accurately and you start doing that more often, did you not improve your end result or not?

Except he isn't playing exactly like he did in NYC. His career best in APG is 3.0, he's at 6.5 APG this year. He's in a different role now than he ever has been in his career, he's never had this much responsibility to both handle scoring and creating for others before so I don't think it makes too much sense to be overly critical over the 12 game sample size because of some regression in efficiency which I think is to be expected in the first place.

[MEDIC]

I didn't go through the numbers they posted with a fine toothed comb, so you might be right. But even if you are, that still proves nothing other than a 30 game outlier vs 300+ games of data.

Also it still does nothing to show that HE was the improvement, and not the system. Unless you think he magically got better for no reason. Again, there is nothing at all to point to improvement being anything HE did, vs how he's being utilized. Which the current stretch of games kinda proves, change up the system or roster, and he plays like trash.

If you think that is an admirable trait for a player, be my guest, but I don't.

If you are utilized in a way that fits your strengths well and you are productive and efficient as a result, you have improved as a player. I don't get why all the credit would go to the system rather than the player in this instance.

If I give you a gun, and tell you to shoot a bullseye on a target 100ft away, and you miss 90% of the time, then I move the target so then it is only 20ft away, and then you start hitting 90% of the time, you didn't just become the greatest marksman the world has ever seen. The entire situation has changed, if you have bad tendencies and require being put in the perfect system to mitigate them as much as possible, and you see improvements. That's the system at work.

Saying "Hey RJ, you suck at these things, stop doing them, and just follow the lines on the white board, we'll get you the ball in great places." that isn't a player becoming magically better overnight, that's a different system entirely.

RJ has not played differently, he's been instructed to be at different places. Listening, while important, is not improvement, unless the argument is that he sucked in NYC because he never listened. And yet again, it was 30 games, relax.

One could argue that the NY coaching staff didn't put him in a position to be successful. They didn't identify his strengths & utilize them properly. It's every leaders responsibility to find their employees stengths & put them in a position to succeed.

Basically what the arguement comes down to is "NY sucked at role management for RJ. The Raptors have been very successful at it".

Is RJ a more useful player here than he was in NY because ot proper role management & utilization? Seems like it.

Whether or not the player "improved" is not as important as "is the player more successful"..